Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2016
Potential sexual function improvement by using transanal mesorectal approach for laparoscopic low rectal cancer excision.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 12 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
48 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexual dysfunction outcomes and reporting disparities after multimodal treatment for rectal cancer: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Pooled it
- EAES, ESCP, and ESGAR update on taTME for rectal cancer-systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Outcomes of transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of matched cohort studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Transanal versus transabdominal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in minimally invasive surgery: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Quality of life and functional outcomes after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer. an updated meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Pooled it
- Comparing perioperative and oncological outcomes of transanal and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive total mesorectal excision versus transanal total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- The incidence and risk factors of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after sphincter-preserving surgery of rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Pooled it
- Comparing functional outcomes between transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled it
- Functional complaints and quality of life after transanal total mesorectal excision: a meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Prospective Multicenter Comprehensive Survey on Male Sexual Dysfunction following Laparoscopic, Robotic, and Transanal Approaches for Rectal Cancer (the LANDMARC Study).Annals of surgery · 2026Trial
- Impact of neoadjuvant treatment on functional outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME)-a case series.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Transanal versus abdominal low rectal dissection for rectal cancer: long-term results of the Bordeaux' randomized trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Trial
- Quality of life and functional outcomes after low anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision: a propensity score-matched comparison of robotic-assisted versus open surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of Abdominoperineal Resection on Postoperative Male Sexual Function After Minimally Invasive Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Subgroup Analysis From the LANDMARC Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Sexual function in chronic illness and cancer perspectives of the patient, partner, and healthcare provider; innovations; and updates: recommendations from the Fifth International Consultation on Sexual Medicine (ICSM 2024).Sexual medicine reviews · 2026Review
- Essential updates 2022-2023: Surgical and adjuvant therapies for locally advanced colorectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePreliminary results of the transanal approach for low rectal cancer suggest better oncological outcomes than the conventional laparoscopic approach. We currently report the functional results.
methodsFrom 2008 to 2012, 100 patients with low rectal cancer and suitable for sphincter-saving resection were randomized between transanal and laparoscopic low rectal dissection. Patients derived from this randomized trial were enrolled for functional assessment. End points were bowel function (LARS bowel and Wexner continence scores) and urogenital function (IPSS, IIEF-5 and FSFI-6 scores) obtained by questionnaires sent to patients with a follow-up more than 12 months.
resultsOverall, 76 patients were eligible and 72 responded to the questionnaire: 38 in the transanal group and 34 in the laparoscopic group. The bowel function did not differ between the transanal and the laparoscopic groups: LARS 36 versus 37 (p = 0.941) and Wexner 9 versus 10 (p = 0.786). The urologic function was also similar between the two groups: IPSS 5.5 versus 3.5 (p = 0.821). Among sexually active patients before surgery, 20 of 28 (71 %) patients in the transanal group and 9 of 23 (39 %) in the laparoscopic group maintained an activity after surgery (p = 0.02). Erectile function was also better in men after transanal compared to laparoscopic low rectal dissection: IIEF 17 versus 7 (p = 0.119).
conclusionTransanal approach for low rectal cancer did not change bowel and urologic functions compared to the conventional laparoscopic approach. However, there was a trend to a better erectile function with a significantly higher rate of sexual activity in the transanal group.
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.