ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2018
Local recurrence after 'standard' abdominoperineal resection: do we really need ELAPE?
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short- and mid-term outcomes of abdominoperineal resection with perineal mesh insertion: a single-centre experience.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Observational
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
Introduction Low rectal cancers requiring abdominoperineal resection tend to have a worse prognosis than higher tumours, which may be treated by anterior resection. One of the reasons for this may be inadequate local surgery, in particular the narrow waist of the resection specimen of a standard abdominoperineal resection may be associated with a high positive circumferential resection margin. The extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) aims to improve the R0 resection rate but carries significant morbidity. We examined our own results of standard abdominoperineal resection to assess the need for a change of policy. Methods We operformed a retrospective analysis of consecutive standard abdominoperineal resections for rectal cancer in a single centre from June 2002 to December 2011. Results A total of 102 patients underwent standard abdominoperineal resection with curative intent; 19 had no preoperative treatment, 42 had short course radiotherapy, 9 had long course radiotherapy and 32 had neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by long course chemoradiotherapy. In 17/102(16.6%), there was a positive circumferential resection margin. Over a median follow up of 32 months, 20 patients developed recurrence of any type. Local recurrence occurred in five patients (two of which also had distant recurrence), of whom two had a positive circumferential resection margin (P = 0.10). Actuarial two-year local only recurrence was 3.4% and any recurrence was 17.7%. Overall five-year cancer specific survival was 77%. Conclusions In this series we found low rates of local recurrence after standard abdominoperineal resection even with a circumferential margin rate positivity of 16.6%.Performing an ELAPE in selected cases may improve these results further but is not necessarily required for all patients.
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.