ArticleSurgery today2020
Laparoscopic multivisceral resection for locally advanced colon cancer: a single-center analysis of short- and long-term outcomes.
Article in Surgery today, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes following open versus laparoscopic multi-visceral resection for locally advanced colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Surgical treatment of locally advanced right colon cancer invading neighboring organs.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- The prognostic impact of primary tumor resection or stoma construction followed by systemic chemotherapy for stage IV colorectal cancer: A Japanese, multicenter study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Article
- Risk factors that impact long-term outcomes in sigmoid colon cancer with urinary bladder involvement.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Effect of endoscopic surgical skill qualification system for laparoscopic multivisceral resection: Japanese multicenter analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Oncological outcomes following laparoscopic surgery for pathological T4 colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.Surgery today · 2021Article
- A Multicenter Analysis of Short-term and Long-term Outcomes Following Laparoscopic Multivisceral Resection for Advanced Colorectal Cancer.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe evaluated the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic multivisceral resection (MVR) in selected patients with locally advanced colon cancer (LACC).
methodsWe compared the clinical backgrounds, and short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic vs. those who underwent open MVR for LACC en bloc at our hospital.
resultsBetween January, 2004 and December, 2015, 140 patients underwent MVR of the primary tumor en bloc via laparoscopic surgery (laparoscopic group; LG, n = 69) or open surgery (open group; OG, n = 71). Laparoscopic surgery was selected mainly for tumors that invaded the bladder and abdominal wall. The LG patients had smaller tumors (60 vs. 80 mm, p < 0.001), less blood loss (30 vs. 181 g, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (12 vs. 19 days, p < 0.001) than the OG patients. Open conversion was required for two patients. Postoperative complications and R0 resection were comparable between the groups. Local recurrence occurred in two LG patients and two OG patients. The 5-year cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, and local disease-free survival of patients with pT4b disease were not significantly different between the LG and OG groups (90.3% vs. 75.2%, 71.2% vs. 67.6%, and 97.1% vs. 94.2%).
conclusionAlthough the LG included patients with lower risk, the short- and long-term outcomes were equivalent to those of the OG, which included patients with higher risk.
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.