ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2020
What factors determine specimen quality in colon cancer surgery? A cohort study.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping Lymphatic Drainage of the Splenic Flexure: Towards a Patient-Specific Surgical Approach for Splenic Flexure Cancer.ANZ journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Is computed tomography assessment of residual arterial pedicle length following colorectal cancer surgery a useful marker of surgical quality?Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Tissue morphometric measurements do not predict survival following colorectal cancer surgery.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Review
- Reduced port versus open right hemicolectomy for colorectal cancer: a retrospective comparison study of two centers.International journal of colorectal disease · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTenets of 'good quality' colon cancer surgery include mesocolic plane dissection to preserve an intact mesocolic fascia/peritoneum, and excision of sufficient mesocolon for adequate lymphadenectomy. However, it remains controversial what clinicopathological factors determine 'good quality' surgery, and whether quality of surgery influences morbidity/mortality. This study documents the quality of colon cancer surgery at a quaternary referral centre and identifies factors that influence quality of surgery and post-operative outcomes.
methodsConsecutive patients who underwent resection for colon adenocarcinoma at St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK (2015-2017), were included. Primary outcome measures included (i) plane of mesocolic dissection, prospectively assessed; and (ii) tissue morphometry (area of mesentery and vascular pedicle length). Other histopathological data were extracted from a prospective database. Clinical data were obtained from the National Bowel Cancer Audit and individual records.
resultsFour hundred five patients were included (mean 69.6 years). The majority (67.4%) of specimens were mesocolic plane dissections. Median area of mesentery excised was 12,085.4 mm
conclusionMajority of resections were 'optimal' mesocolic plane dissections. Open resections yielded better quality specimens, but incurred more morbidity. There is room for improvement in the quality of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery, particularly those performed as emergency.
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.