ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2020
Transanal minimally invasive surgery
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison between endoscopic resection and transanal surgery for treatment of rectal tumors: a systematic review and meta‑analysis.Intestinal research · 2026Review
- Using of endoscopic polypectomy in patients with diagnosed malignant colorectal polyp - The cross-sectional clinical study.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is a good choice for resection of rectal neoplasms. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is also widely used in the treatment of benign rectal tumors such as rectal polyps and rectal adenomas. However, no studies have compared the outcome of TAMIS and EMR.
aimTo compare the short-term outcomes after TAMIS and EMR for rectal carcinoid and benign tumors (including rectal polyps and adenomas).
methodsFrom January 2014 to January 2019, 44 patients who received TAMIS and 53 patients who received EMR at The Fifth People's Hospital of Shanghai were selected. Primary outcomes (surgical-related) were operating time, blood loss, length of postoperative hospital stay, rate of resection margin involvement and lesion fragmentation rate. The secondary outcomes were complications such as hemorrhage, urinary retention, postoperative infection and reoperation.
resultsNo significant differences were observed in terms of blood loss (12.48 ± 8.00 mL for TAMIS
conclusionCompared with EMR, TAMIS can remove lesions more completely with effective hemostasis and lower postoperative hemorrhage and reoperation rates. TAMIS is a better choice for the treatment of rectal carcinoids.
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.