ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Trans-perineal minimally invasive surgery during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transperineal minimally invasive surgery during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer could improve short-term outcomes: A single-institution retrospective cohort study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Efficacy of transperineal minimally invasive surgery with laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision for lower rectal cancer.Surgery today · 2023Article
- Transperineal minimally invasive abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: standardized technique and clinical outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Transperineal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer on the residual rectum after multiple abdominal surgeries in a patient with Crohn's disease: a case report.Surgical case reports · 2021Article
- Feasibility of laparoscopic-assisted transanal pelvic exenteration in locally advanced rectal cancer with anterior invasion.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Pelvic peritoneum closure reduces postoperative complications of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection: 6-year experience in single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Transperineal minimally invasive APE: preliminary outcomes in a multicenter cohort.Techniques in coloproctology · 2020Article
- Transperineal minimally invasive abdomino-perineal resection: preliminary outcomes and future perspectives.Updates in surgery · 2020Article
- Comprehensive and innovative techniques for laparoscopic choledocholithotomy: A surgical guide to successfully accomplish this advanced manipulation.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Transanal TME: new standard or fad?Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2019Review
- Comments on: Clinical Impacts of Minimally Invasive Transperineal Abdominoperineal Resection in Crohn's Disease.Asian journal of endoscopic surgeryArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer (LRC) is performed worldwide. However, APR involves technical difficulties and often causes intractable perineal complications. Therefore, a novel and secure technique during APR is required to overcome these critical issues. Although the usefulness of the endoscopic trans-anal approach has been documented, no series of the endoscopic trans-perineal approach during laparoscopic APR for LRC has been reported.
methodsTrans-perineal minimally invasive surgery (TpMIS) has been used during laparoscopic APR in our institution since April 2014. TpMIS is defined as an endoscopic trans-perineal approach using a single-port device and laparoscopic instruments. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated 50 consecutive patients with LRC who underwent laparoscopic APR at our institution from February 2011 to June 2017 and compared the outcomes of the patients who underwent TpMIS [trans-perineal APR (TpAPR) group, n = 21] versus the conventional trans-perineal approach (conventional group, n = 29). We investigated our experiences with TpMIS in detail and evaluated the safety and utility of TpMIS for patients with LRC. Moreover, major features and difficulties of TpMIS were examined from a surgical viewpoint.
resultsIntraoperative blood loss (median (range) 55 (10-600) vs. 120 (20-1650) ml) and severe perineal wound infection (Clavien-Dindo grade 3, 0 vs. 5 cases) were significantly lower in the TpAPR than conventional group. TpMIS led to a shortened hospital stay (median (range), 14 (10-74) vs. 23 (10-84) days), and neither mortality nor conversion to open surgery occurred in the TpAPR group.
conclusionsMagnified visualization via endoscopy provided more accurate dissection and less blood loss during surgery. Minimal skin incisions enabled a reduction in postoperative perineal complications, and consequently shortened the hospital stay. TpMIS during laparoscopic APR is safe and beneficial for patients with LRC.
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.