ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2017
Clinical and functional results of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer: is there a distinction between the three types of hand-sewn colo-anal anastomosis?
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical efficacy of different approaches for laparoscopic intersphincteric resection of low rectal cancer: a comparison study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Nomogram for Predicting the Probability of Permanent Stoma after Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Article
- Postoperative Functional Management Contributes to Anal Functional Recovery in Patients With Low Rectal Cancer After Robotic Total Intersphincteric Resection.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study is to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of three types of hand-sewn colo-anal anastomosis (CAA) after laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (Lap-ISR) for patients with ultralow rectal cancer.
methodsA total of 79 consecutive patients treated by Lap-ISR for low-lying rectal cancer in an academic medical center from June 2011 to February 2016. According to the distal tumor margin and individualized anal length, the patients underwent three types of hand-sewn CAA including partial-ISR, subtotal-ISR, and total-ISR.
resultsOf the 79 patients, 35.4% required partial-ISR, 43% adopted subtotal-ISR, and 21.5% underwent total-ISR. R0 resection was achieved in 78 patients (98.7%). In addition to distal resection margin, there were no significant differences in clinicopathological parameters and postoperative complications between the three groups. The type of hand-sewn CAA did not influence the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) or local relapse-free survival (LFS). At 24-months follow-up, in spite of higher incontinence scores in total-ISR group, there were not statistically significant differences in functional outcomes including Wexner score or Kirwan grade between the groups. Nevertheless, patients with chronic anastomotic stricture showed worse anal function than those without the complication.
conclusionThe type of hand-sewn CAA after Lap-ISR may not influence oncological and functional outcomes, but chronic stricture deteriorates continence status.
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.