Trial reportJAMA2015
Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection vs Open Resection of Stage II or III Rectal Cancer on Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 514 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Phase III Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection Versus Open Resection for Rectal Cancer
Rectal Surgery Evaluation Trial (RESET): Laparotomy vs Laparoscopy vs Robotic vs TaTME Rectal Surgery Matched Parallel Cohort Trial for High Surgical Risk Cancer Patients, With Mid- to Low Rectal Cancer
Trends and Outcomes in Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer From 2005 to 2016 Using the ACS-NSQIP Database, a Retrospective Cohort Study
Who cites it
514 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,082 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative MRI-based pelvimetry in predicting surgical difficulty in rectal cancer: Implications for personalised surgical planning.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: individual patient data meta-analysis of the ALaCaRT and Z6051 randomized trials.BJS open · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer: meta-analysis of pathological quality indicators.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes of robotic versus transanal total mesorectal excision in patients with rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection in locally advanced rectal cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of Survival Among Adults With Rectal Cancer Who Have Undergone Laparoscopic vs Open Surgery: A Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Early versus delayed defunctioning ileostomy closure after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of safety and functional outcomes.International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Pooled it
- Textbook outcome in low rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic or open surgery: 3-year results from the multicentric LASRE Trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Trial
- Influence of surgical start time on the quality of surgery for middle and low rectal cancer: a post hoc analysis of the real trial.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Feasibility of robotic-assisted surgery in advanced rectal cancer: a multicentre prospective phase II study (VITRUVIANO trial).BJS open · 2024Trial
- Multicenter phase II trial of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: preliminary results.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Excision, and Observation for Early Rectal Cancer: The Phase II NEO Trial (CCTG CO.28) Primary End Point Results.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Trial
- Robotic colorectal cancer surgery: perioperative and oncological outcomes at a national referral center in Mexico.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Clinical Implementation and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Pelvic Exenteration for Primary Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Japanese Experience.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Gender-Specific Cancer-Related Survival Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Observational
- Robotic versus laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
454 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
25 authors at 18 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
importanceEvidence about the efficacy of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is incomplete, particularly for patients with more advanced-stage disease.
objectiveTo determine whether laparoscopic resection is noninferior to open resection, as determined by gross pathologic and histologic evaluation of the resected proctectomy specimen. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsA multicenter, balanced, noninferiority, randomized trial enrolled patients between October 2008 and September 2013. The trial was conducted by credentialed surgeons from 35 institutions in the United States and Canada. A total of 486 patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were randomized after completion of neoadjuvant therapy to laparoscopic or open resection.
interventionsStandard laparoscopic and open approaches were performed by the credentialed surgeons. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome assessing efficacy was a composite of circumferential radial margin greater than 1 mm, distal margin without tumor, and completeness of total mesorectal excision. A 6% noninferiority margin was chosen according to clinical relevance estimation.
resultsTwo hundred forty patients with laparoscopic resection and 222 with open resection were evaluable for analysis of the 486 enrolled. Successful resection occurred in 81.7% of laparoscopic resection cases (95% CI, 76.8%-86.6%) and 86.9% of open resection cases (95% CI, 82.5%-91.4%) and did not support noninferiority (difference, -5.3%; 1-sided 95% CI, -10.8% to ∞; P for noninferiority = .41). Patients underwent low anterior resection (76.7%) or abdominoperineal resection (23.3%). Conversion to open resection occurred in 11.3% of patients. Operative time was significantly longer for laparoscopic resection (mean, 266.2 vs 220.6 minutes; mean difference, 45.5 minutes; 95% CI, 27.7-63.4; P < .001). Length of stay (7.3 vs 7.0 days; mean difference, 0.3 days; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1), readmission within 30 days (3.3% vs 4.1%; difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%), and severe complications (22.5% vs 22.1%; difference, 0.4%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%) did not differ significantly. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in 462 operated and analyzed surgeries was complete (77%) and nearly complete (16.5%) in 93.5% of the cases. Negative circumferential radial margin was observed in 90% of the overall group (87.9% laparoscopic resection and 92.3% open resection; P = .11). Distal margin result was negative in more than 98% of patients irrespective of type of surgery (P = .91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for pathologic outcomes. Pending clinical oncologic outcomes, the findings do not support the use of laparoscopic resection in these patients.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00726622.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.