Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32968923›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

Clinical outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision using a lateral-first approach for low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

Takeru Matsuda, Kimihiro Yamashita, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Masataka Fujikawa, Hiroki Sakamoto, Masashi Yamamoto, Shingo Kanaji, Taro Oshikiri, Tetsu Nakamura, Satoshi Suzuki and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Takeru MatsudaDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan. takerumatsuda@nifty.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9541-856X
Kimihiro YamashitaDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Hiroshi HasegawaDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Masataka FujikawaDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Hiroki SakamotoDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Masashi YamamotoDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Shingo KanajiDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Taro OshikiriDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Tetsu NakamuraDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Satoshi SuzukiDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Yoshihiro KakejiDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Kobe University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough transanal total mesorectal excision (ta-TME) is adopted for rectal cancer surgery by an increasing number of surgeons, it is still technically challenging. We have employed a lateral-first approach for ta-TME to overcome technical difficulties. However, its outcomes and advantage over conventional laparoscopic TME remain unclear.

methodsThirty-five consecutive patients who underwent ta-TME using a lateral-first approach (the ta-TME group) and 53 consecutive patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic TME (the lap-TME group) for low rectal cancer were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create balanced cohorts of ta-TME (n = 28) and lap-TME (n = 28). Their clinical outcomes were compared after PSM.

resultsThe operative time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly lower in the ta-TME group than in the lap-TME group (P = 0.042 and P < 0.001, respectively). Postoperative complications ≥ Clavien-Dindo grade II were significantly less and postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ta-TME group (35.7% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.003, and 18 days vs. 32 days, P < 0.001, respectively). The distal margin was significantly larger in the ta-TME when excluding the abdominoperineal resection cases (20 mm vs. 10 mm, P = 0.032). The positive radial margin was observed in 2 of 28 patients (7.1%) in the ta-TME group.

conclusionsTa-TME using a lateral-first approach is feasible and may offer several advantages over lap-TME in terms of short-term outcomes. It might be an alternative safe approach for ta-TME. To confirm the oncological superiority of this surgery, further study in a larger population and for a longer follow-up period is warranted.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRectal NeoplasmsRectumTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopic TMELow rectal cancerPropensity score matchingTa-TME

Identifiers

PMID32968923
OpenAlexW3088517151

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.