Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25561999›Full record

ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2014

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer: single center experience.

Narimantas Samalavicius, Marijus Ambrazevicius, Alfredas Kilius, Kestutis Petrulis

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Narimantas SamalaviciusCenter of Oncosurgery, Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania ; Clinic of Internal Diseases, Family Medicine and Oncology of Medical Faculty, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Marijus AmbrazeviciusCenter of Oncosurgery, Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Alfredas KiliusCenter of Oncosurgery, Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Kestutis PetrulisCenter of Oncosurgery, Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Vilnius University · LT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe use of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is increasing due to the ability to perform minimally invasive local treatment with large full-thickness local excision under improved vision.

aimTo evaluate the initial experience with TEM for early rectal cancer in a single center. MATERIAL AND

methodsFrom February 2010 to November 2013 a total of 20 patients underwent TEM for early rectal cancer. Nine were women and 11 men, age range 39 to 88 years (median: 71 years). The postoperative surveillance protocol, which includes rigid proctoscopy, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and endorectal ultrasound every 3 months during the first 2 years, was applied to all patients after TEM.

resultsFinal histology revealed 14 (70%) lesions to be T1 and 6 (30%) T2 cancers. There were no postoperative complications. All 6 patients in the pT2 group and those in the pT1 group with unfavorable histology were offered adjuvant chemoradiotherapy or immediate radical surgery. Patients were followed up from 2 to 35 months (median: 21 months). There was one local recurrence (5%) in a patient who refused to undergo abdominoperineal excision for T1 low rectal cancer, had unfavorable histology after TEM, and for which reason underwent postoperative chemoradiation. The patient had abdominoperineal resection 7 months after TEM (rpT2N0M0). One patient was lost to follow-up. The rest of the patients are alive and disease-free.

conclusionsIn our hands, TEM was an alternative to total mesorectal excision in patients with low-risk early rectal cancer. Further follow-up is necessary to evaluate recurrence and survival rates after TEM for patients with invasive rectal cancer.

Indexed as

early rectal cancerrecurrencesurvivaltransanal endoscopic microsurgery

Identifiers

PMID25561999
PMCPMC4280406
OpenAlexW2335586927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.