ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2020
Anal function and quality of life analysis after laparoscopic modified Parks for ultra-low rectal cancer patients.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of life in restorative versus non-restorative resections for rectal cancer: systematic review.BJS open · 2021Pooled it
- The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Sphincter-preserving surgical techniques in low rectal cancer management: A systematic review of contemporary evidence.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- A new way to remedy anastomotic leakage after TaTME: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- Risk factors influencing sphincter preservation in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the learning curve for conformal sphincter preservation operation in the treatment of ultralow rectal cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo assess postoperative anal function and quality of life of ultra-low rectal cancer patients treated by laparoscopic modified Parks surgery.
methodsFrom February 2017 to March 2019, 114 patients with ultra-low rectal cancer above T2 were treated respectively with ultra-low anterior resection (Dixon), modified coloanal anastomosis (modified Parks), and Miles according to the preoperative stage and anastomotic position. The postoperative anal function and Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale (FIQL) of each patient were collected and synthetically analyzed.
resultsCompared with the Dixon group, the postoperative anal function and FIQL in the Parks group were poor at the early stage. However, from 6 to 12 months after surgery, the scores of anal function and FIQL in the Parks group were similar to those in the Dixon group (P > 0.05). Compared with the Miles group, the FIQL of the two groups were similar in the early postoperative stage. However, with the passage of time, from 3 to 9 months after surgery, the four domains of FIQL in the Parks group were higher than those in the Miles group successively (P < 0.05).
conclusionsLaparoscopic modified Parks is a safe, effective, and economical anus-preserving surgery. Although its early anal function and FIQL were poor, it could gradually recover to the similar level as Dixon. Moreover, it can save the anus and obtain a better postoperative quality of life for some patients who previously could only undergo Miles.
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.