Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29611044›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic versus open rectal cancer resection: a high-quality population-based analysis in a Southern German district.

Teresa Draeger, Vinzenz Völkel, Michael Gerken, Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke, Alois Fürst

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Long term oncological outcomes for laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer - A population-based nationwide noninferiority study.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Teresa DraegerUniversität Regensburg, Universitätsstraße 31, 93053, Regensburg, Germany. teresa.draeger@gmx.de.ORCID 0000-0002-1155-1567
Vinzenz VölkelUniversität Regensburg, Universitätsstraße 31, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Michael GerkenTumorzentrum Regensburg, Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Versorgungsforschung der Universität Regensburg, Am BioPark 9, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Monika Klinkhammer-SchalkeTumorzentrum Regensburg, Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Versorgungsforschung der Universität Regensburg, Am BioPark 9, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Alois FürstCaritas Krankenhaus St. Josef Regensburg, Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral-, Thoraxchirurgie und Adipositasmedizin, Landshuter Str. 65, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn increasing number of rectal carcinoma resections in Germany and worldwide are performed laparoscopically. The recently published COLOR II trial demonstrated the oncologic safety of this surgical approach. It remains unclear whether these findings can be transferred to clinical practice. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis population-based retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate 5-year overall, relative, disease-free, and local recurrence-free survival of rectal cancer patients treated by open surgery and laparoscopy. Data from a southern German region of 1.1 million inhabitants were collected by an official clinical cancer registry. All primary non-metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma cases with surgery between 2004 and 2013 were eligible for inclusion. To compare survival rates, Kaplan-Meier analyses, relative survival models, and multivariate Cox regression were applied; a sensitivity analysis assessed bias by exclusion.

resultsFinally, 1507 patients with a median follow-up time of 7.1 years were included. Of these patients, 28.4% underwent laparoscopic procedures, with an increasing rate over time. Patients with tumors of the upper or middle rectum, younger patients, and patients of specialized colorectal cancer centers were more likely to undergo laparoscopy. After 5 years, 80.4% of laparoscopy patients were still alive, compared to 68.6% in the open group (p < 0.001). Moreover, laparoscopy was associated with superior local recurrence-free survival rates. This advantage was also significant in multivariate analysis (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.92).

conclusionLaparoscopic rectal cancer surgery can be considered safe in daily clinical practice. This should be confirmed by future studies outside the setting of randomized trials.

Indexed as

AgedColectomyDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGermanyHumansIncidenceLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedRectal NeoplasmsRectumRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTime FactorsBowel cancerCohort studiesHealth services researchMinimal invasive surgeryRegistries

Identifiers

PMID29611044
PMCPMC6132875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.