ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Minimally Invasive Surgery for Pelvic Exenteration in Primary Colorectal Cancer.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- R0 Resection Rates in Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pelvic Exenteration for Colorectal Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of oncosurgical and quality of life outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection with Ureterectomy and Ileal Ureter Interposition for Ureter-Invading Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer: A Case Report.Surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Robotic versus open and laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for pelvic cancer: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis in Japan.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Outcomes Following Treatment of Pelvic Exenteration for Rectal Cancer in a Tertiary Care Center.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Current status of robot-assisted total pelvic exenteration focusing on the field of urology: a clinical practice review.Translational cancer research · 2024Review
- Empty pelvis syndrome: a retrospective audit from a tertiary cancer center.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- The Influence of Analgesic Modalities on Postoperative Cancer Recurrence.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2022Review
- Article
- Article
- State-of-the-art surgery for recurrent and locally advanced rectal cancers.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Review
- Urinary reconstruction following total pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer: complications and factors affecting outcomes.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic Posterior Pelvic Exenteration with Radical Vulvectomy for Intestinal-type Vulvar Adenocarcinoma.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive surgery (MIS) for pelvic exenteration is not a well-established technique. The aim was to assess the safety and feasibility of MIS for pelvic exenteration in locally advanced primary colorectal cancer and to compare the perioperative outcomes with open surgery.
methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of patients, who had undergone pelvic exenteration for primary colorectal adenocarcinoma from May 2013 to July 2018. The short-term outcomes like perioperative details and histopathological characteristics were compared between the two groups.
resultsMIS was performed in 23 patients and open pelvic exenteration was carried out in 72 patients. The mean operative time was significantly more in the MIS group (640 vs. 432 min,
conclusionMIS is feasible and safe for total pelvic exenteration and posterior exenteration in carefully selected locally advanced primary colorectal cancer, when performed by an experienced surgical team in high volume centers. An R0 resection with adequate margin can be achieved with good perioperative outcomes in MIS. Long-term oncological outcomes would require further follow up to confirm.
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.