Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2019
A randomized clinical trial comparing the initial vascular approach to the inferior mesenteric vein versus the inferior mesenteric artery in laparoscopic surgery of rectal cancer and sigmoid colon cancer.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovative pancreas-guided technique for splenic flexure mobilization in laparoscopic left hemicolectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Effect of sigmoidectomy in treating sigmoid colon cancer: A protocol of systematic review.Medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe inferior mesenteric artery approach with a selective lateral splenic flexure mobilization is the most widely used initial step in laparoscopic rectal and left colon surgery. Surgery started through the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) with systematic medial mobilization (MM) has some theoretical advantages that have never been analyzed in a clinical trial. The aim of this study was to compare the two techniques with regards to surgical technique variables (conversion, surgical time, bleeding, morbidity, and mortality) and pathological outcomes.
methodsA single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial of patients operated electively by laparoscopic with curative intention for rectal or sigmoid cancer was performed at a single, specialized colorectal surgery department from April 2016 to October 2017.
results49 patients were included in each group. There were no statistical differences in patient demographics between the two approaches. Pathological outcomes did not differ between the two groups. Intra-operative characteristics showed a higher conversion rate in patients in which the inferior mesenteric artery was dissected first (p = 0.031). The artery approach also increased intra-operative bleeding (p = 0.049), but there were no differences regarding operative time. On multivariate analysis, the artery approach was associated with a higher risk of conversion (OR 8.68; p = 0.050). Post-operatory complications did not differ between artery and vein dissection.
conclusionsIn our study, the initial approach by the IMV with a systematic MM of the splenic flexure has allowed us to reduce the conversion rate without increasing complications or the surgical time. No differences were observed in the pathological results. Both approaches seem to be safe and effective and well-trained laparoscopic surgeons should have the two techniques available to them for use as needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30377755What 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.