Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30120582›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019

How accurate is preoperative colonoscopic localization of colonic neoplasia?

Laura M Fernandez, Rowaa N M Ibrahim, Ido Mizrahi, Giovanna DaSilva, Steven D Wexner

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Endoscopy in surgery.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. A Real-Time Endoscope Motion Tracker.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Laura M FernandezDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Rowaa N M IbrahimDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Ido MizrahiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Giovanna DaSilvaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA.
Steven D WexnerDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, 2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL, 33331, USA. wexners@ccf.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPreoperative colonoscopic localization for resection of colonic neoplasia, with or without tattooing for guidance, has been extensively used with variable accuracy. Difficulty in intraoperative identification of the lesion may lead to resection of an incorrect segment or to a more extensive resection than originally planned. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of preoperative colonoscopy in determining the site of the lesion.

methodsA prospectively collected IRB-approved institutional database was retrospectively queried for all consecutive patients who underwent an elective colon resection for neoplasia between 2013 and 2016. Excluded were patients without preoperative colonoscopy reports available for comparison or who underwent emergency surgery. Surgical plan based on preoperative colonoscopic localization with or without tattooing was compared to the final surgery and pathology reports.

results203 patients were included [mean age 68 (35-92) years; 102 males (50.2%)]. Preoperative colonoscopy was inaccurate in 16.7% (34 patients) leading to a change in the surgical plan. Patients with transverse or distal lesions were more likely to have a change in final surgical management compared to proximal sided lesions (29.7% vs. 3.9%, respectively; p < 0.001). Only 3.8% of the tattooed lesions could not be identified during surgery. Additional intraoperative colonoscopy was needed in 11 patients (5.5%) to verify exact lesion location. Average length of the resected segment was longer in patients who required a change in surgical plan (26.44 cm vs. 22.47 cm; p = 0.02).

conclusionInaccurate preoperative colonoscopic localization led to a change in surgical management in 16.7% of cases, especially in transverse or left sided lesions. Surgeons should consider these findings when planning colonic resections.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overColectomyColonic NeoplasmsElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansIntraoperative PeriodMaleMiddle AgedPreoperative CareRetrospective StudiesTattooingColonic resectionColorectal neoplasiaLeft sided lesionsLocalizationManagementPreoperative colonoscopy

Identifiers

PMID30120582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.