Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32623536›Full record

SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2020

The role of MRI pelvimetry in predicting technical difficulty and outcomes of open and minimally invasive total mesorectal excision: a systematic review.

J S-Y Hong, K G M Brown, J Waller, C J Young, M J Solomon

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

J S-Y HongSurgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Sydney, Australia. drjonhong@gmail.com.
K G M BrownSurgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0967-8515
J WallerDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
C J YoungSurgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Sydney, Australia.
M J SolomonSurgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Sydney, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe difficulty of performing total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer partly relies on the surgeon's subjective assessment of the individual patient's pelvic anatomy and tumour characteristics, which generally influences the choice of platform used (open, laparoscopic, robotic or trans-anal surgery). Recent studies have found associations between several anatomical pelvic measurements and surgical difficulty. The aim of this study was to systematically review existing data reporting the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based pelvic measurements to predict technical difficulty and outcomes of TME, and determine whether pelvimetry could optimise patient-specific selection of a particular surgical approach.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for studies reporting MRI-based pelvic measurements in patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer, and the effect of these measurements on surgical difficulty.

resultsEleven studies reporting the association between MRI-pelvimetry measurements and rectal cancer surgical outcomes were included. Indicators for surgical difficulty used in the included studies were involved circumferential resection margin, longer operative time, incomplete TME, higher blood loss, anastomotic leak, conversion to open surgery and overall complications. Bony pelvic measurements which were associated with increased surgical difficulty in more than one study were a smaller interspinous distance, a smaller intertubercle distance, a smaller pelvic inlet and larger pubic tubercle height. Two studies identified larger mesorectal fat area as a predictor of surgical difficulty.

conclusionsBony pelvic measurements may predict surgical difficulty during TME, however, use of different indicators of difficulty limit comparison between studies. Early data suggest MRI soft tissue measurements may predict surgical difficulty and warrants further investigation.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPelvimetryPelvisTreatment OutcomeMagnetic resonance imagingMesorectal excisionPelvimetryRectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID32623536
OpenAlexW3038952887

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.