ArticleWorld journal of surgery2016
Surgical Results and Oncologic Outcomes for Rectal Cancer with Tailored Mesorectal Excision over Two Decades.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of early experience of robotic and transanal total mesorectal excision using propensity score matching.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the characteristics of the tumors, the management strategy, and oncologic outcomes of patients with rectal cancer surgery in these two periods: period 1 (1993-2001) and period 2 (2002-2011).
methodsAll patients who underwent radical resection of rectal cancer from 1993 to 2011 were included. Comparisons of the patients' demographics, characteristics, operating results, and oncologic outcome between the two periods were undertaken.
resultsRadical resection for rectal cancer was performed in 1611 patients (993 men). Patients were significantly older and more had comorbid medical diseases in period 2. More laparoscopic resections were performed and more patients had preoperative chemoradiation in period 2. The postoperative mortality was significantly lower and the hospital stay was significantly shorter in period 2. In those with non-metastatic cancer, the 5-year local recurrences of patients in period 1 and period 2 were 11.9 and 5.9 %, respectively. (p = 0.002) The patients in period 2 had significantly better 5-year overall (68.1 vs. 60.2 %, p = 0.003) and 5-year cancer-specific survival (76.1 vs. 69.4 %, p < 0.001) when compared with those treated in period 1. The improvement occurred mainly in patients with abdominoperineal resection and those with stage III diseases. In the multivariate analysis, among the other histological factors, operations performed in period 2 and laparoscopic surgery were independent factors associated with better overall survival.
conclusionsSignificant improvement in the surgical outcomes in terms of a lower recurrence rate and better survival was achieved in the recent years with the increase in neoadjuvant therapy and the application of laparoscopic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26801507What 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.