ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2015
Clinical comparison of laparoscopy vs open surgery in a radical operation for rectal cancer: A retrospective case-control study.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- An evidence map and synthesis review with meta-analysis on the risk of incisional hernia in colorectal surgery with standard closure.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Pooled it
- A prospective randomized study of multimodal analgesia combined with single injection transversus abdominis plane block versus epidural analgesia against postoperative pain after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Trial
- Efficacy of laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer in older patients and its effects on inflammatory factors.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- A low-cost unity-based virtual training simulator for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy using HTC Vive.PeerJ. Computer science · 2023Article
- GINS complex subunit 4, a prognostic biomarker and reversely mediated by Krüppel-like factor 4, promotes the growth of colorectal cancer.Cancer science · 2020Article
- Application of sevoflurane inhalation combined with epidural anesthesia in patients with colorectal cancer and its effect on postoperative perceptual function.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Prognostic Value of the Cycle Number of Perioperative Chemotherapy in Locoregionally Advanced Rectal Cancer: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Journal of Cancer · 2018Article
- Surgical injury: comparing open surgery and laparoscopy by markers of tissue damage.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Article
- Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in patients with unresectable locally advanced colon cancer: a prospective observational study.OncoTargets and therapy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess the diverse immediate and long-term clinical outcomes, a retrospective comparison between laparoscopic and conventional operation was performed.
methodsA total number of 916 clinical cases, from January 2006 to December 2013 in our hospital, were analyzed which covered 492 patients underwent the laparoscopy in radical resection (LRR) and 424 cases in open radical resection (ORR). A retrospective analysis was proceeded by comparing the general information, surgery performance, pathologic data, postoperative recovery and complications as well as long-term survival to investigate the diversity of immediate and long-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic radical operation.
resultsThere were no statistically significance differences between gender, age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), tumor loci, tumor node metastasis stages, cell differentiation degree or American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of the patients (P > 0.05). In contrast to the ORR group, the LRR group experienced less operating time (P < 0.001), a lower blood loss (P < 0.001), and had a 2.44% probability of conversion to open surgery. Postoperative bowel function recovered more quickly, analgesic usage and the average hospital stay (P < 0.001) were reduced after LRR. Lymph node dissection during LRR appeared to be slightly more than in ORR (P = 0.338). There were no obvious differences in the lengths and margins (P = 0.182). And the occurrence rate in the two groups was similar (P = 0.081). Overall survival rate of ORR and LRR for 1, 3 and 5 years were 94.0% and 93.6% (P = 0.534), 78.1% and 80.9% (P = 0.284) and 75.2% and 77.0% (P = 0.416), respectively.
conclusionLaparoscopy as a radical operation for rectal cancer was safe, produced better immediate outcomes. Long-term survival of laparoscopy revealed that it was similar to the open operation.
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.