ArticleWorld journal of surgery2021
Team Strategy Optimization in Combined Resections for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases. A Comparative Study with Bootstrapping Analysis.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic versus robotic surgery in the setting of combined resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an experience from the I Go MILS registry.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Combined Resections for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases: Are Two Teams Better than One?World journal of surgery · 2021Article
- One-Stage Total Laparoscopic Treatment for Colorectal Cancer With Synchronous Metastasis. Is It Safe and Feasible?Frontiers in surgery · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study was to evaluate perioperative outcomes and to evaluate factors influencing rative morbidity and adoption of minimally invasive technique in 1-team (1-T) versus two teams (2-T) management of synchronous colorectal liver metastases.
methodsWithin four referral centers, a group of 234 patients treated in 1-T centers was identified and compared with a group of 253 patients treated in 2-T. A nonparametric bootstrap process was applied to the original cohorts of 1-T group and 2-T group as a resampling method to obtain bootstrapped cohorts (155 patients per group).
results33.5% of patients in 1-T boot group and 38.1% in the 2-T boot group were operated by laparoscopic approach. Multivariate analysis revealed that approach to primary tumor (laparoscopic or open) and intraoperative blood loss were independent prognostic factors for morbidity. Team approach did not show any significant correlation with incidence of postoperative complications nor with choice for laparoscopic approach.
conclusionThe optimization of team strategy for patients with SCRLM is not solely based on the adoption of a 1-T or 2-T approach, but should instead be based on the implementation of a standard protocol for management of these patients.
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.