Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32383054›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2020

Minimally Invasive Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: A National Perspective on Short-term Outcomes and Morbidity.

James P Taylor, Miloslawa Stem, Azah A Althumairi, Susan L Gearhart, Bashar Safar, Sandy H Fang, Jonathan E Efron

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it

0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

Perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection in younger rectal cancer cohorts: a systematic review and meta-analysis with narrative functional assessment.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026
Pooled it
Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026
Pooled it
Robot-assisted Pelvic Reconstruction Using Rectus Abdominis Flap: Efficiency Evaluation of Adding a Third Surgeon.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
Article
Robotic Rectus Abdominis Myoperitoneal Flap for Posterior Vaginal Wall Reconstruction: Experience at a Single Institution.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
Article
Transperineal minimally invasive surgery during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer could improve short-term outcomes: A single-institution retrospective cohort study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024
Article
Low Anterior Resection Syndrome following Restorative Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: Can the Surgeon Have Any Meaningful Impact?Cancers · 2024
Review
Robotic Rectus Abdominis Harvest for Pelvic Reconstruction after Abdominoperineal Resection.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2023
Review
Surgical treatment of rectal cancer: prospective cohort study about good oncologic results and low rates of abdominoperineal excision.Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2023
Article
Real-world comparison of curative open, laparoscopic and robotic resections for sigmoid and rectal cancer-single center experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

James P TaylorColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Miloslawa StemColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Azah A AlthumairiColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Susan L GearhartColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Bashar SafarColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Sandy H FangColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Jonathan E EfronColorectal Research Unit, Ravitch Colorectal Division, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 733 North Broadway, Suite 101, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. jefron1@jhmi.edu.

Johns Hopkins University · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrior randomized trials showed comparable short-term outcomes between open and minimally invasive proctectomy (MIP) for rectal cancer. We hypothesize that short-term outcomes for MIP have improved as surgeons have become more experienced with this technique.

methodsRectal cancer patients who underwent elective abdominoperineal resection (APR) or low anterior resection (LAR) were included from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2016-2018). Patients were stratified based on intent-to-treat protocol: open (O-APR/LAR), laparoscopic (L-APR/LAR), robotic (R-APR/LAR), and hybrid (H-APR/LAR). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the impact of operative approach on 30-day morbidity.

resultsA total of 4471 procedures were performed (43.41% APR and 36.59% LAR); O-APR 42.72%, L-APR 20.99%, R-APR 16.79%, and H-APR 19.51%; O-LAR 31.48%, L-LAR 26.34%, R-LAR 17.48%, and H-LAR 24.69%. Robotic APR and LAR were associated with shortest length of stay and significantly lower conversion rate. After adjusting for other factors, lap, robotic and hybrid APR and LAR were associated with decreased risk of overall morbidity when compared to open approach. R-APR and H-APR were associated with decreased risk of serious morbidity. No difference in the risk of serious morbidity was observed between the four LAR groups.

conclusionAppropriate selection of patients for MIP can result in better short-term outcomes, and consideration for MIP surgery should be made.

Indexed as

AgedDatabases, FactualElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresMorbidityPostoperative ComplicationsProctectomyRectal NeoplasmsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32383054

DOI10.1007/s00268-020-05560-9

OpenAlexW3023605928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.