ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2017
Comparison of trans-anal endoscopic operation and trans-anal excision of rectal tumors.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the transanal surgical techniques for local excision of rectal tumors: a network meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2020Pooled it
- Management of early rectal cancer; current surgical options and future direction.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Review
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
backgroundTrans-anal endoscopic operation (TEO) has developed to facilitate proper tumor location and ensure excision safely.
methodsWe reviewed 92 patients enrolled in our database between 2006 and 2014 who were diagnosed with early rectal tumors and who underwent conventional trans-anal excision (TAE) or TEO. Clinical data were collected prospectively to compare safety and feasibility between two techniques.
resultsNinety-two patients underwent trans-anal local excision for lower rectal tumors. TEO and TAE were performed in 48 and 44 patients, respectively. Age, sex, and comorbidities were similar. There was no significant difference in tumor diameter (1.6 ± 1.68 cm vs. 1.17 ± 1.17, respectively). Tumor height, however, was higher in the TEO (7.46 ± 3 cm) than the TAE group (3.84 ± 1.88 cm, p < 0.001). Four complications, perianal abscess, and two perforations, occurred in the TEO group, whereas no major complications occurred in the TAE. Seven patients (14.6%) underwent TEO underwent a salvage operation compared to only a single patient in TAE group (2.3%, p = 0.039). Eight patients (17.4%) diagnosed with adenocarcinoma developed recurrence, four in each group. Disease-free survival was similar between groups (TEO - 41.8 months, 95% RI 39.4-44.1; TAE 79.7 months, 95% RI 72.2-87.3). However, more TAE patients (n = 7, 15.9%) than TEO patients (n = 2, 4.2%) underwent chemotherapy.
conclusionsTEO treatment of local rectal tumors is safe and feasible and can achieve an adequate resection margin. Local recurrence was similar in both groups. However, the numbers of salvage operations and minor complications were higher in the TEO 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.