ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology2016
Systematic review of laparoscopic vs open surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03816995 (A Novel Wound Retractor Combining Continuous Irrigation and Barrier Protection Reduces Incisional Contamination and Surgical Site Infection in Colorectal Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 54 papers, 7 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 Novel Wound Retractor Combining Continuous Irrigation and Barrier Protection Reduces Incisional Contamination and Surgical Site Infection in Colorectal Surgery
Who cites it
54 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 99 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intracorporeal or extracorporeal anastomosis after minimally invasive right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer resection: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Selective Opioid Antagonists Following Bowel Resection for Prevention of Postoperative Ileus: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Pooled it
- Colorectal resection via natural orifice specimen extraction versus conventional laparoscopic extraction: a meta-analysis with meta-regression.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Pooled it
- Laparoscopic liver resection in elderly patients: systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of medial-to-lateral versus lateral-to-medial colorectal mobilisation during laparoscopic colorectal surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Pooled it
- Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly versus non-elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Pooled it
- Risk factors for postoperative complications after colorectal surgery in patients aged ≥ 80 years: A multicenter retrospective study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Article
- Safety and short-term outcomes of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer in the very elderly (≥ 85 Years): a multicenter propensity score-matched study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Psychiatric diseases in patients following colorectal operations: a single-centre retrospective study.Przeglad gastroenterologiczny · 2026Article
- Towards safer colorectal surgery worldwide: Outcomes and benchmarks from the ESCP CORREA 2022 audit.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- Homecare After Cancer Surgery for Older Adults: Derivation and Validation of a Predictive Tool.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic vs. open surgery for rectal cancer in patients with obesity: short-term outcomes and relapse-free survival across age groups.Surgery today · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery: an observational study of medicare advantage and fee-for-service beneficiaries.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Observational
- Guideline for the assessment and management of gastrointestinal symptoms following colorectal surgery-A UEG/ESCP/EAES/ESPCG/ESPEN/ESNM/ESSO collaboration. Part II-Good practice guidance | sequelae to benign diseases.United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of short- and long-term outcomes in laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer patients undergoing hemodialysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Analyzing postoperative complications in colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review enhanced by artificial intelligence.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Review
- Update on the management of elderly patients with colorectal cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Article
- Impact of laparoscopic surgery on short-term and long-term outcomes in elderly obese patients with colon cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo verify the safety and validity of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer in elderly patients.
methodsA meta-analysis was performed of a systematic search of studies on an electronic database. Studies that compared laparoscopic colectomy (LAC) in elderly colorectal cancer patients with open colectomy (OC) were retrieved, and their short and long-term outcomes compared. Elderly people were defined as 65 years old or more. Inclusion criteria were set at: Resection of colorectal cancer, comparison between laparoscopic and OC and no significant difference in backgrounds between groups.
resultsFifteen studies were identified for analysis. LAC was performed on 1436 patients, and OC performed on 1810 patients. In analyses of short-term outcomes, operation time for LAC was longer than for OC (mean difference = 34.4162, 95%CI: 17.8473-50.9851, P < 0.0001). The following clinical parameters were lower in LAC than in OC: Amount of estimated blood loss (mean difference = -93.3738, 95%CI: -132.3437 to -54.4039, P < 0.0001), overall morbidity (OR = 0.5427, 95%CI: 0.4425-0.6655, P < 0.0001), incisional surgical site infection (OR = 0.6262, 95%CI: 0.4310-0.9097, P = 0.0140), bowel obstruction and ileus (OR = 0.6248, 95%CI: 0.4519-0.8638, P = 0.0044) and cardiovascular complications (OR = 0.4767, 95%CI: 0.2805-0.8101, P = 0.0062). In analyses of long-term outcomes (median follow-up period: 36.4 mo in LAC, 34.3 mo in OC), there was no significant difference in overall survival (mean difference = 0.8321, 95%CI: 0.5331-1.2990, P = 0.4187) and disease specific survival (mean difference = 1.0254, 95%CI: 0.6707-1.5675, P = 0.9209). There was also no significant difference in the number of dissected lymph nodes (mean difference = -0.1360, 95%CI: -4.0553-3.7833, P = 0.9458).
conclusionLAC in elderly colorectal cancer patients had benefits in short-term outcomes compared with OC except operation time. The long-term outcomes and oncological clearance of LAC were similar to that of OC. These results support the assertion that LAC is an effective procedure for elderly patients with colorectal cancer.
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.