ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Multicentre propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 rectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- 2023 WSES guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of iatrogenic urinary tract injuries (IUTIs) during emergency digestive surgery.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2023Guideline
- Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Short-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic vs open rectal excision for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Pooled it
- Clinical Implementation and Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Pelvic Exenteration for Primary Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Japanese Experience.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Treatment outcomes of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery with multivisceral resection of adjacent organs.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Integration of near-infrared fluorescence imaging and Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound in laparoscopic resection of colorectal liver metastases: a dual-center retrospective study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Open Surgery in Colorectal Cancer Patients.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
- Robotic beyond total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancers: Perioperative and oncological outcomes from a multicentre case series.European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2024Article
- Minimally invasive versus open multivisceral resection for rectal cancer clinically invading adjacent organs: a propensity score-matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Resection of sigmoid cancer with bladder invasion using laparoscopic combined with a cystoscopic holmium laser: an innovative surgical procedure.Lasers in medical science · 2023Article
- Minimally invasive surgery for maximally invasive tumors: pelvic exenterations for rectal cancers.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2022Article
- The Multidisciplinary Approach of Rectal Cancer: The Experience of "COMRE Group" Model.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic vs. open colectomy for T4 colon cancer: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of prospective observational studies.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Robotic surgery for clinical T4 rectal cancer: short- and long-term outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Article
- Robotic-assisted resection for beyond TME rectal cancer: a novel classification and analysis from a specialized center.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Similarities and differences between study designs in short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, case-matched, and cohort studies.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2021Review
- Feasibility of laparoscopic-assisted transanal pelvic exenteration in locally advanced rectal cancer with anterior invasion.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of laparoscopy for advanced-stage rectal cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the operative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic (LAR) versus open anterior rectal resection (OAR) for patients with pT4 rectal cancer.
methodsThis is a multicenter propensity score matching (PSM) study of patients undergoing elective curative-intent LAR or OAR for pT4 rectal cancer (TNM stage II/III/IV) between 2005 and 2015.
resultsIn total, 137 patients were included in the analysis. After PSM, demographic, clinical and tumor characteristics were similar between the 52 LAR and the 52 OAR patients. Overall, 52 tumors were located in the high rectum, 25 in the mid-rectum and 27 in the low rectum. Multivisceral resection was performed in 26.9% of LAR and 30.8% of OAR patients (p = 0.829). Conversion was required in 11 LAR patients (21.2%). The LAR group showed significantly shorter time to flatus (3.13 vs. 4.97 days, p = 0.001), time to regular diet (3.59 vs. 6.36 days, p < 0.0001) and hospital stay (15.49 vs. 17.96 days, p = 0.002) compared to the OAR group. The 90-day morbidity and mortality were not different between groups. In the majority of patients (85.6%), R0 resection was achieved. A complete mesorectal excision was obtained in 82.7% of LAR and 78.8% of OAR patients (p = 0.855). The 1-, 2- and 3-year overall survival rates were, respectively, 95.6, 73.8 and 66.7% for the LAR group and 86.7, 66.9 and 64.1% for the OAR group (p = 0.219). The presence of synchronous metastases (hazard ratio 2.26), R1 resection (HR 2.71) and lymph node involvement (HR 2.24) were significant predictors of overall survival.
conclusionThe present study suggests that LAR for pT4 rectal cancer can achieve good pathologic and oncologic outcomes similar to open surgery despite the risk of conversion. Moreover, laparoscopy offers the benefits of a faster recovery and a shorter hospital stay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27826780What 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.