ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2017
Analysis of local recurrences after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for low risk rectal carcinoma.
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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Local Recurrence of Premalignant and Early Malignant Rectal Polyps Treated by TEM-A Single-Center Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- What Is the Comparative Efficacy of Surgical, Endoscopic, Transanal Resection, and Radiotherapy Modalities in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Long-term oncological outcomes after local excision of T1 rectal cancer.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Article
- Impact of ≥ 0.1-mm free resection margins on local intramural residual cancer after local excision of T1 colorectal cancer.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: exploring its indications and novel applications. A narrative review.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Review
- Prognosis of Patients Over 60 Years Old With Early Rectal Cancer Undergoing Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery - A Single-Center Experience.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- The risk factors of local recurrence and distant metastasis on pT1/T2N0 mid-low rectal cancer after total mesorectal excision.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Mesorectal radiotherapy for early stage rectal cancer: A novel target volume.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2020Article
- A new procedure combining local resection with endoscopic submucosal dissection for low rectal tumor: a four-case series.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Survival analysis of local excision vs total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer in pT1/pT2 stage and intermediate pathological risk.World journal of surgical oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimRates of local recurrence (LR) after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal carcinoma vary; the reasons remain unclear. We analyzed LR after TEM for low-risk pT1 (G1/2/X, L0/X) rectal carcinoma to investigate the influence of completeness of resection and occult lymph node metastasis on risk of LR.
methodLR location and stage, completeness of resection of primary carcinoma (minimal distance between tumor and resection line ≤1 mm vs >1 mm), and incidence of involved lymph nodes in resected LR specimens were collected, and tumor characteristics of LR were compared with primary carcinoma. Distant metastasis and overall and cancer-specific survival were determined.
resultsLR developed in 14 patients; in 2/4 with R1/X resection, in 3/8 (38%) with clear margins (R0) but a minimal distance of ≤1 mm, and in 9/88 (10%) with formally complete resection. Six of nine patients with formally complete resection underwent radical surgery for LR; in five out of these six, lymph nodes were not involved. In 5/14 patients, LR was poorly differentiated compared to primary carcinoma. Main LR causes were incomplete tumor resection or tumor persistence after formally complete resection. Overall (p = 0.008) and cancer-specific (p < 0.001) survival was lower in LR patients compared to non-LR patients, even if lymph nodes were uninvolved.
conclusionsThe results suggest that most LRs after TEM for low-risk rectal cancer were caused by residual tumor at the previous excision site and not by undetected lymph node metastases. By improved standardization of surgical techniques to ensure complete resection of carcinomas and thorough pathological assessments, most LRs seem to be avoidable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27888300What 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.