Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33575499›Full record

ReviewJMA journal2021

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

Shinichi Yamauchi, Takatoshi Matsuyama, Masanori Tokunaga, Yusuke Kinugasa

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in JMA journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Low anterior resection syndrome: can it be prevented?International journal of colorectal disease · 2021
    Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Shinichi YamauchiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Takatoshi MatsuyamaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Masanori TokunagaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Yusuke KinugasaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer has seen remarkable improvement. For the laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer, earlier postoperative recovery and reduced hospital stays can be expected compared to those for open surgery. Also, no increase in perioperative morbidity and mortality has been shown. Furthermore, long-term oncological outcomes comparable to open surgery have been obtained. Although laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has shown good short-term postoperative outcomes, recent randomized controlled trials could not demonstrate non-inferiority to open surgery with respect to oncological safety. Further studies are required to confirm the impact of robotic surgery on colon and rectal cancer and the appropriate indications for transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

Indexed as

colorectal cancerlaparoscopic surgeryminimally invasive surgeryrobotic surgerytransanal minimally invasive surgery

Identifiers

PMID33575499
PMCPMC7872784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.