Observational studyRadiology and oncology2020
Standard and multivisceral colectomy in locally advanced colon cancer.
Observational study in Radiology and oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Associated with Severe Postoperative Complications (Clavien-Dindo Grades III-IV) After Left-Sided Colon Cancer Surgery: A Single-Centre Retrospective Cohort Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Oncologic outcomes of multivisceral resection for locally advanced colorectal cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Narrative review of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2025Review
- Risk factors affecting delay of initiating adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colorectal cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Perioperative and oncological outcomes following robotic en bloc multivisceral resection for colorectal cancer.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Management of locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) is challenging. Surgery is the mainstay of the treatment, yet its outcomes remain unclear, especially in the setting of multivisceral resections. The aim of the study was to examine the outcomes of standard and multivisceral colectomy in patients with LACC. Patients and methods Patients demographics, clinical and perioperative data of patients operated within study period 2004-2018 were collected. LACC was defined as stage T4 colon cancer including tumor invasion either through the visceral peritoneum or to the adjacent organs/structures. Accordingly, either standard or multivisceral colectomy (SC and MVC) was performed. Results Two hundred and three patients underwent colectomy for LACC. Of those, 112 had SC (55.2%) and 91 (44.8%) had MVC. Severe morbidity and mortality rates were 5.9% and 2.5%, respectively. MVC was associated with an increased blood loss (200 ml vs. 100 ml, p = 0.01), blood transfusion (22% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.01), longer operative time (180 minutes vs. 140 minutes, p < 0.01) and postoperative hospital stay (11 days vs. 10 days, p < 0.01) compared with SC. The complication-associated parameters were similar. Male gender, presence of ≥ 3 comorbidities, tumor location in the left colon and perioperative blood transfusion were associated with complications in the univariable analysis. In the multivariable model, the presence of ≥ 3 comorbidities was the only independent predictor of complications. Conclusions Colectomy with or without multivisceral resection is a safe procedure in LACC. In experienced hands, the postoperative outcomes are similar for SC and MVC. Given the complexity of the latter, these procedures should be reserved to qualified expert centers.
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.