Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26342816›Full record

ArticleSurgery today2016

Laparoscopic-assisted abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer provides a shorter length of hospital stay while not affecting the recurrence or survival: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Manfred Odermatt, Karen Flashman, Jim Khan, Amjad Parvaiz

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery today, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03422835 (A Prospective Cohort Study of Robotic Transanal Total Mesentery Excision Versus Conventional Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer in Low Site), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

NCT03422835 phase2unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective Cohort Study of Robotic Transanal Total Mesentery Excision Versus Conventional Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer in Low Site

TypeinterventionalSponsorDaping Hospital and the Research Institute of Surgery of the Third Military Medical UniversityRan2018 to 2023Enrolled50ConditionsRectal NeoplasmsArmsR-TME, R-TaTME
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Manfred OdermattMinimally Invasive Colorectal Unit, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK. manfred.odermatt@gmx.ch.
Karen FlashmanMinimally Invasive Colorectal Unit, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK.
Jim KhanMinimally Invasive Colorectal Unit, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK.
Amjad ParvaizMinimally Invasive Colorectal Unit, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, PO6 3LY, UK.
Queen Alexandra Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the short- and intermediate-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer.

methodsElective open and laparoscopic APRs were identified in a prospective database and were 1:1 propensity score-matched for age, ASA grade, tumour stage and type of neoadjuvant therapy. The short- and intermediate-term outcomes were compared.

resultsFrom January 2003 until June 2013, a total of 135 APRs (87 open, 48 laparoscopic) were identified and matched (n = 96, standardised mean difference of covariates <0.25). The thirty-day mortality, R0 rate, lymph nodes harvested and reoperations were similar. The length of the hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group [10 versus 14 days, p = 0.004 (Mann-Whitney U test), Bonferroni-corrected significance level = 0.0083]. The median follow-up was 4.6 (IQR: 2.0-6.0) years. The overall and recurrence-free 3-year survival rate estimates (Kaplan-Meier method; 95 % CI in brackets) were 71 % (59-86) and 57 % (44-73) in the open group versus 78 % (66-92) and 72 % (60-87) in the laparoscopic group, respectively [p = 0.167 and p = 0.186 (log-rank test), respectively]. The 3-year cumulative incidence of recurrence was 27 % (15-40) in the open group and 16 % (8-29) in the laparoscopic group [p = 0.359 (Gray's test)].

conclusionsCompared to open APR, laparoscopic APR provided a shorter length of hospital stay while showing no intermediate-term differences in the survival or cumulative incidence of recurrence.

Indexed as

Propensity ScoreAbdomenAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDigestive System Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPerineumRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesAbdominoperineal resectionAdvanced rectal cancerLaparoscopic total mesorectal excisionRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID26342816
OpenAlexW1483482501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.