Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32632708›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2020

Minimally invasive right colectomy with transrectal natural orifice extraction: could this be the next step forward?

C-C Cheng, Y-R Hsu, Y-J Chern, W-S Tsai, H-Y Hung, C-K Liao, J-M Chiang, P-S Hsieh, J-F You

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05740267 (Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for Colorectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05740267 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for Colorectal Cancer (NOSE for CRC)

TypeinterventionalSponsorChang Gung Memorial HospitalRan2023 to 2025Enrolled318ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsNatural Orifice Specimen Extraction
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Extraction Site in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2023
    Review
  8. Outcomes after natural orifice extractionWorld journal of clinical oncology · 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

9 authors.

C-C ChengDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Y-R HsuDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Y-J ChernDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
W-S TsaiDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
H-Y HungDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
C-K LiaoDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
J-M ChiangDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
P-S HsiehDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
J-F YouDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, No. 5, Fu-Hsing St., Kuei-Shan, Taoyuan, Taiwan. jenodyssey@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5748-1659

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) approach for right-side colon surgery has been proven to exhibit favorable short-term outcomes. However, thus far, no study has reported the advantages of transrectal NOSE for right-side colon surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the technical feasibility, safety, and short-term outcomes of minimally invasive right hemicolectomy using the transrectal NOSE method and those of conventional mini-laparotomy specimen extraction.

methodsA study was conducted on consecutive patients who had minimally invasive right hemicolectomy either for malignancy or benign disease at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan, between January 2017 and December 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: conventional surgery with specimen extraction using mini-laparotomy and NOSE surgery. Surgical outcomes, including complications, postoperative short-term recovery, and pain intensity, were analyzed.

resultsWe enrolled 297 patients (151 males, mean age 64.9 ± 12.8 years) who had minimally invasive right hemicolectomy. Of these 297 patients, 272 patients had conventional surgery with specimen extraction through mini-laparotomy and 25 patients had NOSE surgery (23 transrectal, 2 transvaginal). The diagnosis of colon disease did not differ significantly between the conventional and NOSE groups. Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were comparable. The postoperative hospital stay was significantly (p = 0.004) shorter in the NOSE group (median 5 days, range 3-17 days) than in the conventional group (median 7 days, range 3-45 days). Postoperative pain was significantly (p = 0.026 on postoperative day 1 and p = 0.002 on postoperative day 2) greater in the conventional group than in the NOSE group.

conclusionsNOSE was associated with acceptable short-term surgical outcomes that were comparable to those of conventional surgery. NOSE results in less postoperative wound pain and a shorter hospital stay than conventional surgery. Larger studies are needed.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyNatural Orifice Endoscopic SurgeryAgedColectomyHumansLaparotomyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopic surgeryMinimally invasive surgeryNatural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE)Right colectomyRight hemicolectomy

Identifiers

PMID32632708
PMCPMC7536150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.