Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26497544›Full record

SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2015

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a single center experience and systematic review of the literature.

Nicola de'Angelis, Luca Portigliotti, Daniel Azoulay, Francesco Brunetti

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 16 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Meta-analysis of transanalWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022
    Article
  20. 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.

Nicola de'AngelisUnit of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Henri Mondor Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Est-UPEC, 51, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France. nic.deangelis@yahoo.it.
Luca PortigliottiGeneral Surgery Department, University of Eastern Piedmont, A. O. U. "Maggiore della Carità" Hospital, Novara, Italy.
Daniel AzoulayUnit of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Henri Mondor Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Est-UPEC, 51, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France.
Francesco BrunettiUnit of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Henri Mondor Hospital, AP-HP, Université Paris Est-UPEC, 51, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe present study aimed to compare the operative and oncologic results of transanal total mesorectum excision (Ta-TME) ("down-to-up") vs. laparoscopic TME (L-TME, "up-to-down") for low rectal cancer. Additionally, a systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the quality of the current body of evidence on Ta-TME.

methodsThe study population included 32 consecutive patients who underwent Ta-TME between January 2011 and December 2014 that were compared with a matched group of patients undergoing L-TME between January 2008 and December 2010. The literature search was performed following the PRISMA guidelines for a systematic review.

resultsTa-TME was associated with significantly shorter operative time (195 vs. 225 min; p = 0.017) and hospital stay (7.8 vs. 9.7 days; p = 0.018) compared to L-TME. No group differences were observed for intra-/postoperative complications and oncologic outcomes. One patient in the Ta-TME and two patients in the L-TME group developed local recurrence. The estimated survival rate at 2 years was 95.5 % for the Ta-TME and 96.6 % for the L-TME group (p = 0.646). The literature search identified 22 relevant retrospective studies on 423 patients operated on Ta-TME or robotic-assisted transanal TME for rectal cancer. The only two comparative studies found similar short-term oncologic outcomes between Ta-TME and L-TME. A complete mesorectum was observed in 85 % of Ta-TME cases. The conversion rate was estimated at 4.3 % and the postoperative complication rate at 30.4 %.

conclusionsTa-TME appears to be safe and feasible. It may find special application in patients with anatomic constraints that could make L-TME highly challenging.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAdenocarcinomaAgedDigestive System Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRectal NeoplasmsSurvival RateTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopyRectal cancerTotal mesorectal excisionTransanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision

Identifiers

PMID26497544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.