ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2020
Manometric assessment of anorectal function after transanal total mesorectal excision.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05671809 (Effects of Different Treatment for Anorectal Function of Patients With Rectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Effects of Different Treatment for Anorectal Function of Patients With Rectal Cancer: a Study Protocol for a Prospective, Observational, Controlled, Multicentre Study
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transanal versus transabdominal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in minimally invasive surgery: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- The Role of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation (PTNS) in Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Pooled it
- Long-term oncologic outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision: a single-center cohort with a minimum of 5-year follow-up.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Article
- Guideline for the assessment and management of gastrointestinal symptoms following colorectal surgery-A UEG/ESCP/EAES/ESPCG/ESPEN/ESNM/ESSO collaboration. Part I-Sequelae to oncological diseases.United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Article
- Article
- Transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a comparative study of long-term oncological outcomes.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- Functional Outcomes after Transanal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2022Review
- The Association Between Dietary Intake and Improvement of LARS Among Rectal Cancer Patients After Sphincter-Saving Surgery-A Descriptive Cohort Study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Defecation disorder and anal function after surgery for lower rectal cancer in elderly patients.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Article
- Low anterior resection syndrome: can it be prevented?International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Review
- Reply to: Robotic-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: more questions than answers.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- One-year evaluation of anorectal functionality and quality of life in patients affected by mid-to-low rectal cancer treated with transanal total mesorectal excision.Updates in surgery · 2021Observational
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is common following surgery for mid and low rectal cancer. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) involves intraoperative stretching of the anal sphincter while an anal single port is placed, which can potentially further disturb anorectal function. The aim of our study was to systematically assess anal function after TaTME using anorectal manometry and questionnaires.
methodsPatients who had TaTME for rectal cancer at our institution were prospectively assessed by means of anorectal manometry and the standard LARS score. The primary endpoint was the resting pressure to assess internal sphincter damage and the secondary endpoints were squeeze pressure to assess external anal sphincter and analysis of correlation between LARS score and these two manometry parameters. Patients who had laparoscopic TME (LaTME) served as a control group.
resultsOut of 81 patients invited to participate 48 accepted. There were 36 in theTaTMEgroup, and 12 in the LaTMEgroup. The mean follow-up time from the index operation date to the assessment date was 41.34 months (± SD 24.834). The mean resting pressure did not differ significantly between the groups (36.44 mmHg ± 18.514 and 36.58 mmHg ± 13.318 in the TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively, p = 0.981). The mean squeeze pressure was also comparable (125.00 mmHg ± 66.141 and 111.83 mmHg ± 51.111 in the TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively, p = 0.533). The mean LARS score was comparable and showed comparable results. The analysis of correlation between LARS score and manometry parameters showed no significant associations between resting or squeeze pressure and L:ARS score.
conclusionsFollowing TME surgery, the resting and squeeze pressures of the anal sphincter measured by manometry were generally decreased, with no differences between the transanal and laparoscopic approaches.
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.