Observational studyMedicine2017
Outcomes of patients with abdominoperineal resection (APR) and low anterior resection (LAR) who had very low rectal cancer.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04134104 (Incidence of The Bowel, Bladder, and Sexual Dysfunction Following Surgery for Colorectal Malignancy), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Incidence of The Bowel, Bladder, and Sexual Dysfunction Following Surgery for Colorectal Malignancy
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Changes in fatigue in rectal cancer patients before and after therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Pooled it
- Evolution of treatment patterns and survival outcomes in non-metastatic rectal cancer: a 15-year real-world single-center analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Predictive model for sphincter preservation in lower rectal cancer.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Outcomes of Distal Rectal Cancer Patients Who Did Not Qualify for Watch-and-Wait: Comparison of Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Essential knowledge and technical tips for total mesorectal excision and related procedures for rectal cancer.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Review
- A short-term study of laparoscopic-dominant individualised levator ani resection in abdominoperineal resection: A retrospective investigation.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2024Article
- Comparison of oncologic outcome of abdominoperineal resection versus sphincter saving resection for low lying rectal cancer.Korean journal of clinical oncology · 2021Article
- The burden of low anterior resection syndrome on quality of life in patients with mid or low rectal cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
- Article
- Treatment of Rectal Cancer in Older Adults.Current oncology reports · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared the oncological outcomes of sphincter-saving resection (SSR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR) in 409 consecutive patients with very low rectal cancer (i.e., tumors within 3 cm from the anal verge); 335 (81.9%) patients underwent APR and 74 (18.1%) underwent SSR. The APR group comprised higher proportions of men (67.5% vs 55.4%, P = .049) and advanced-stage patients (P < .001). Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) was more frequently administered in the SSR group (83.8% vs 52.8%, P < .001). Overall, the systemic and local recurrence rates were 29.1% and 6.1%, respectively. On stratification according to PCRT and pathologic stage, the mode of surgery did not affect the recurrence type. Moreover, recurrence-free survival (RFS) did not differ according to the mode of surgery in different cancer stages. RFS was associated with ypT and ypN stages in patients who received PCRT, while pN stage, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement were risk factors for RFS in those who did not receive PCRT. Notably, SSR was not found to be a risk factor for RFS in either subgroup. Patients who were stratified according to cancer stage and PCRT also showed no differences in RFS according to the mode of surgery. Our results demonstrate that, regardless of PCRT administration, SSR is an effective treatment for very low rectal cancer, while CRM is an important prognostic factor for patients who did not receive PCRT.
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.