ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2018
Intersphincteric Resection for Patients With Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Oncological and Functional Outcomes.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term efficacy and short-term outcomes of intersphincteric resectionWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- A randomized controlled trial of a digital lifestyle intervention involving postoperative patients with colorectal cancer.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Long-term functional and prognostic outcomes of robotic intersphincteric resection for treating low rectal cancer: a single-center retrospective study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Successful sphincter preservation and long-term survival in a patient with ultra-low locally advanced rectal cancer treated with photodynamic therapy combined with multimodal treatment: a case report and literature review.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Does anastomotic leakage after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer influence long-term outcomes? A retrospective observational study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Observational
- Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2022Review
- Functional outcomes of intersphincteric resection in low rectal tumors.Turkish journal of surgery · 2022Article
- Trans-Anastomotic Drainage Tube Placement After Hand-Sewn Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: An Alternative Drainage Method.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- A case of effective Delorme's procedure for colonic mucosal prolapse after intersphincteric resection.Journal of surgical case reports · 2021Article
- Simplification or Accuracy: In Assessing Functional Outcomes After Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer.Annals of coloproctology · 2020Article
- Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2020Review
- Long Term Results of Modified Intersphincteric Resections for Low Rectal Cancer: A Single Center Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2019Article
- Postoperative Bowel Function After Anal Sphincter-Preserving Rectal Cancer Surgery: Risks Factors, Diagnostic Modalities, and Management.Annals of coloproctology · 2019Review
- Factors influencing changing bowel habits in patients undergoing sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer.International wound journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this review is to evaluate the outcomes after an intersphincteric resection (ISR) for patients with low-lying rectal cancer. Reports published in the literature regarding surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of an ISR were reviewed. The morbidity after an ISR was 7.7%-32%, and anastomotic leakage was the most common adverse event. Local recurrence rates ranged from 0% to 12%, 5-year overall survival rates ranged from 62% to 92%, and rates of major incontinence ranged from 0% to 25.8% after an ISR. An ISR is a safe procedure for sphincter-saving rectal surgery in patients with very low rectal cancer; it does not compromise the oncological outcomes of the resection and is a valuable alternative to an abdominoperineal resection. While the functional outcomes after an ISR were found to be acceptable, the long-term functional outcome and quality of life still require careful investigation. ISRs have been performed with surgical and oncologic safety on patients with low-lying rectal cancer. However, patients must be selected very carefully for an ISR, considering the associated functional derangement and the limited extent of the resection.
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.