ArticleJAMA network open2020
Association of Image-Guided Navigation With Complete Resection Rate in Patients With Locally Advanced Primary and Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-time intraoperative ultrasound registration for accurate surgical navigation in patients with pelvic malignancies.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Trial
- Electromagnetic Surgical Navigation for Accurate Pediatric Tumor Localization: A Preclinical Animal Cadaver Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Real-time surgical navigation for intraoperative lymph node localization during targeted robot-assisted pelvic and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant chemo-reirradiation followed by resection and intraoperative electron beam radiotherapy: outcomes of multimodality treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Molecular Basis, Diagnostic Approaches, and Therapeutic Strategies in Colorectal Cancer-Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Tailored-Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Based on 3D Mathematical Reconstruction Surgical Planner: Prospective Multicenter Study.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Surgical navigation for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in rectal cancer.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Review
- Surgical navigation for targeted retroperitoneal lymph-node removal: a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Post-operative complications following dose adaptation of intra-operative electron beam radiation therapy in locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer.Journal of contemporary brachytherapy · 2024Article
- Stereotactic Navigation-Assisted Laparoscopic Resection of Challenging Low Pelvic Tumors: A Case Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The influence of the da Vinci surgical robot on electromagnetic tracking in a clinical environment.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Navigation-Assisted Surgery for Locally Advanced Primary and Recurrent Rectal Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Feasibility of tracked ultrasound registration for pelvic-abdominal tumor navigation: a patient study.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2023Article
- Correction: Groen et al. Use of Image-Guided Surgical Navigation during Resection of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Observational
- Image-guided navigation for locally advanced primary and locally recurrent rectal cancer: evaluation of its early cost-effectiveness.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Use of Image-Guided Surgical Navigation during Resection of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Errors in Figure 3 and Supplement 2.JAMA network open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The percentage of tumor-positive surgical resection margin rates in patients treated for locally advanced primary or recurrent rectal cancer is high. Image-guided navigation may improve complete resection rates. Objective: To ascertain whether image-guided navigation during rectal cancer resection improves complete resection rates compared with surgical procedures without navigation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective single-center nonrandomized controlled trial was conducted at the Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The prospective or navigation cohort included adult patients with locally advanced primary or recurrent rectal cancer who underwent resection with image-guided navigation between February 1, 2016, and September 30, 2019, at the tertiary referral hospital. Clinical results of this cohort were compared with results of the historical cohort, which was composed of adult patients who received rectal cancer resection without image-guided navigation between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2015. Intervention: Rectal cancer resection with image-guided navigation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the complete resection rate, measured by the amount of tumor-negative resection margin rates. Secondary outcomes were safety and usability of the system. Safety was evaluated by the number of navigation system-associated surgical adverse events. Usability was assessed from responses to a questionnaire completed by the participating surgeons after each procedure. Results: In total, 33 patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer were included (23 men [69.7%]; median [interquartile range] age at start of treatment, 61 [55.0-69.0] years). With image-guided navigation, a radical resection (R0) was achieved in 13 of 14 patients (92.9%; 95% CI, 66.1%-99.8%) after primary resection of locally advanced tumors and in 15 of 19 patients (78.9%; 95% CI, 54.4%-94.0%) after resection of recurrent rectal cancer. No navigation system-associated complications occurred before or during surgical procedures. In the historical cohort, 142 patients who underwent resection without image-guided navigation were included (95 men [66.9%]; median [interquartile range] age at start of treatment, 64 [55.0-70.0] years). In these patients, an R0 resection was accomplished in 85 of 101 patients (84.2%) with locally advanced rectal cancer and in 20 of 41 patients (48.8%) with recurrent rectal cancer. A significant difference was found between the navigation and historical cohorts after recurrent rectal cancer resection (21.1% vs 51.2%; P = .047). For locally advanced primary tumor resection, the difference was not significant (7.1% vs 15.8%; P = .69). Surgeons stated in completed questionnaires that the navigation system improved decisiveness and helped with tumor localization. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this study suggest that image-guided navigation used during rectal cancer resection is safe and intuitive and may improve tumor-free resection margin rates in recurrent rectal cancer. Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register Identifier: NTR7184.
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.