Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34097812›Full record

ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2021

Laparoscopic wedge resection as an alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection for benign endoscopically unresectable colon polyps.

Carla Christine Maria Marres, Marieke P C M Smit, Jarmila D W van der Bilt, Christianne J Buskens, Marco W Mundt, Paul C M Verbeek, Willem A Bemelman, Anthony Willem Hendrik van de Ven

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Laparoscopic wedge resection as an alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection for benign endoscopically unresectable colon polyps.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2021
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carla Christine Maria MarresDepartment of Surgery, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.
Marieke P C M SmitDepartment of Surgery, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.
Jarmila D W van der BiltDepartment of Surgery, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.
Christianne J BuskensDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marco W MundtDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.
Paul C M VerbeekDepartment of Surgery, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.
Willem A BemelmanDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anthony Willem Hendrik van de VenDepartment of Surgery, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.
Flevoziekenhuis · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe aim of this study was to investigate, by comparing clinical and histological outcomes, whether laparoscopic (hybrid) wedge resection (LWR) could be a less invasive and safe alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection (OCR) for patients with an endoscopically unresectable, suspected benign, colon polyp.

methodAll patients with an endoscopically unresectable colon polyp who were referred for surgery between 2009 and 2018 and without biopsy-proven colon cancer were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with macroscopic features of malignancy during endoscopy were excluded. Clinical and histological results for patients who underwent OCR or LWR were reviewed.

resultsOne hundred-and-twenty-two patients were included. Ninety-seven patients underwent OCR and 25 LWR. Major complications occurred in 16.7% (n = 16) of the OCR group compared with 4.0% (n = 1) of the LWR group (p = 0.06). In the OCR group the anastomotic leakage rate was 6.3% (n = 6) and the mortality rate 3.1% (n = 3). No anastomotic leakage or deaths occurred in the LWR group. The median length of hospital stay after OCR was 5 days [interquartile range (IQR) 5-9 days)] compared with 2 days (IQR 2-4 days) after LWR (p < 0.0001). Definite pathology showed a malignancy rate of 4.2% (n = 4) in the OCR group and 4.0% (n = 1) (without high-risk features) in the LWR group.

conclusionThis study shows that LWR was associated with significantly lower complication rates and acceptable oncological risks compared with OCR. Therefore we suggest that LWR is a safe alternative treatment, next to other endoscopic options. The treatment that is most suitable for an individual patient should be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting.

Indexed as

Colonic PolypsLaparoscopyColectomyColonHumansLength of Staycolon polypscolorectal surgerylaparoscopic

Identifiers

PMID34097812
PMCPMC8518389
OpenAlexW3172783637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.