ReviewFrontiers in oncology2020
Ultimate Functional Preservation With Intersphincteric Resection for Rectal Cancer.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of Clinical Efficacy and Safety Between da Vinci Robotic and Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Impacts of neoadjuvant therapy on subsequent surgical difficulty, safety, and outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer: a narrative review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- Four clinical dilemmas in surgical decision making for low rectal cancer.Discover oncology · 2026Review
- Use of the Alexis® Wound Protector for Exposure and Sterility in Perianal Oncologic Surgery: A Technical Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Clinical progress and technological innovations in sphincter-preserving treatment for ultra-low rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Stoma-Free Intersphincteric Resection in Low Rectal Cancer Without Radiotherapy: A Prospective Cohort Study on Safety and Recovery.Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2026Article
- Sphincter-preserving surgical techniques in low rectal cancer management: A systematic review of contemporary evidence.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Functional outcomes and quality of life after intersphincteric resection with transverse coloplasty pouch anastomosis for ultralow rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- The Review of Modified Intersphincteric Resection in the Treatment of Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Three-dimensional printing for preoperative rehearsal and intraoperative navigation during laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery with left colic artery preservation.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Dissection layer selection based on an understanding of pelvic fascial anatomy in transanal total mesorectal excision.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Review
- Elderly Rectal Cancer: An Updated Review.Current oncology reports · 2024Review
- Low anterior resection syndrome and quality of life after intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Article
- Does anastomotic leakage after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer influence long-term outcomes? A retrospective observational study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Observational
- Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Review
- Simplification or Accuracy: In Assessing Functional Outcomes After Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer.Annals of coloproctology · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The proximity of the very low rectum rectal cancer to the anal sphincter raises a specific problem: how and until when can we preserve the anal continence without compromising the oncological result of the tumor resection? In this situation, intersphincteric resection (ISR) offers an excellent alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR), but the selection of patients for this option must be extremely precise. This complex choice justifies the simultaneous consideration of an oncological approach with a functional approach in order to provide a full benefit to the patient. When a circumferential resection margin of at least 1 mm can be performed with a distal resection margin of at least 1 cm with or without preoperative radiotherapy, ISR ensures a safety choice. The oncological results of ISR reported in the literature when performed properly found a 5-year disease-free survival of 80.2% with a local recurrence rate of only 5.8%. In parallel to this oncological evaluation, the expected post-operative functional outcome and the resulting quality of life must be properly assessed pre-operatively, since partial or total resection of the internal sphincter impacts significantly on the functional outcome. Based on data from the literature, this work reports the essential anatomical considerations and then the oncological and functional elements indispensables when an anal continence preservation is evoked for a tumor of the very low rectum. Finally, the precise selection criteria and the major surgical principles are outlined in order to guarantee the safety of this modern choice for the patient.
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.