ArticleMedicine2017
Sphincter-preserving surgery for low-middle rectal cancer: Can we predict feasibility with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging?
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-based nomogram for predicting feasibility of sphincter-preserving surgery in mid-low rectal cancer.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2026Article
- Four clinical dilemmas in surgical decision making for low rectal cancer.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- Predicting the Feasibility of Curative Resection in Low Rectal Cancer: Insights from a Prospective Observational Study on Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Accuracy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Observational
- Clinical application of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision using the intersphincteric approach through the sacrococcygeal incision for treating patients with rectal cancer.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study proposed to evaluate the feasibility of predicting sphincter-sparing surgery (SSS) preoperatively in low-middle rectal cancer by using magnetic resonance (MR).The study included both retrospective and prospective design. In the retrospective design, the distance from lower edge of tumor to upper margin of the internal sphincter (Dis1) and distance to anal verge (Dis2) were measured on MR, the distance to anal verge recorded by colonoscopy (Dis3) and digital rectal examination (Dis4) were also obtained. ROC analysis was conducted and cut-off value was determined with overall and stratified analysis. The prospective part was designed to validate the predictive capability of the optimal distance.The retrospective design included 278 patients with middle or lower rectal adenocarcinoma, the prospective design included 106 patients with neoadjuvant therapies. The primary outcome was the actual surgical method and pathological distal resection margin. Dis1 obtained from MRI presented better performance than other distances in determining the surgical approach, with AUC of 0.997 (95% CI, 0.934-1.000). Dis1 was selected as the optimal distance and a cut-off value of 2 cm was determined. Dis1 and the cut-off value were also validated in the prospective sample, with AUC of 0.996 (95% CI, 0.989-1.000) and an overall accuracy of 99.1%.MR-based distance from lower edge of tumor to upper margin of the internal sphincter could be used to help the surgeons to predict the feasibility of SSS preoperatively.
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.