Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31147361›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Multicentre, randomised trial comparing acellular porcine collagen implant versus gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap for reconstruction of the pelvic floor after extended abdominoperineal excision of rectum: study protocol for the Nordic Extended Abdominoperineal Excision (NEAPE) study.

Martin Rutegård, Jörgen Rutegård, Markku M Haapamäki

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01347697 (Nordic Extended Abdominoperineal Excision), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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.

NCT01347697 nacompletednot on this map

Nordic Extended Abdominoperineal Excision (NEAPE) Study, a RCT Comparing a Porcine Acellular Dermal Collagen Implant (Biological Mesh) With a Gluteus Maximus Flap for Reconstruction of Pelvic Floor After ELAPE in Rectal Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUmeå UniversityRan2011 to 2024Enrolled91ConditionsRectal Cancer, Defect of Floor of Lesser PelvisArmsReconstruction with an acellular porcine dermal collagen implant (biological mesh), Reconstruction with a gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Martin RutegårdDepartment of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Surgery, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0974-6373
Jörgen RutegårdDepartment of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Surgery, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Markku M HaapamäkiDepartment of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Surgery, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Umeå University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDifferent surgical techniques are used to cover the defect in the floor of the lesser pelvis after an 'extralevator' or 'extended' abdominoperineal excision for advanced rectal cancer. However, these operations are potentially mutilating, and the reconstruction method of the pelvic floor has been studied only sparsely. We aim to study whether a porcine-collagen implant is superior or equally beneficial to a gluteus maximus myocutaneous flap as a reconstruction method. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre non-blinded randomised controlled trial with the experimental arm using a porcine-collagen implant and the control arm using a gluteus maximus muscle and skin rotation flap. Considered for inclusion are patients with rectal cancer, who are operated on with a wide abdominoperineal rectal excision including most of the levator muscles and where the muscle remnants cannot be closed in the midline with sutures. Patients with a primary or recurrent rectal cancer with an estimated survival of more than a year are eligible. The randomisation is computer generated with a concealed sequence and stratified by participating hospital and preoperative radiotherapy regimen. The main outcome is physical performance 6 months after surgery measured with the timed-stands test. Secondary outcomes are perineal wound healing, surgical complications, quality of life, ability to sit and other outcomes measured at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. To be able to state experimental arm non-inferiority with a 10% margin of the primary outcome with 90% statistical power and assuming 10% attrition, we aim to enrol 85 patients from May 2011 onwards. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Regional Ethical Review board at Umeå University (protocol no: NEAPE-2010-335-31M). The results will be disseminated through patient associations and conventional scientific channels. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01347697; Pre-results.

Indexed as

Myocutaneous FlapAbsorbable ImplantsAcellular DermisAdolescentAdultAgedAnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsButtocksCollagenHumansMiddle AgedMulticenter Studies as TopicMuscle, SkeletalPatient SelectionPelvic FloorBiocompatible MaterialsCollagenextralevatormyocutaneous flapphysical functionporcine implantpostoperative disabilityrectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID31147361
PMCPMC6549677
OpenAlexW2947167656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.