Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34370279›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2022

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection for colorectal cancer in elderly patients: a propensity-score matching study.

Hao Zhang, Hanqing Hu, Rui Huang, Zilong Guan, Mingyu Zheng, Chao Xu, Zhengliang Li, Yuliuming Wang, Weiyuan Zhang, Lei Yu and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. State of the science of sexual health among older cancer survivors: an integrative review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Hao ZhangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1437-9918
Hanqing HuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Rui HuangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Zilong GuanDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Mingyu ZhengDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Chao XuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Zhengliang LiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Yuliuming WangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Weiyuan ZhangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Lei YuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Yinghu JinDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Qingchao TangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Guiyu WangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Cancer Hospital of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou, China. guiywang@163.com.
Xishan WangDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. wxshan_1208@126.com.
Harbin Medical University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNZhejiang Cancer Hospital · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81872034National Provincial Natural Fund H2017016Wu Jieping Medical Foundation 320.6750.19092-41
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whether natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) could provide beneficial effects in treating elderly patients is still under debate. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical outcomes of transanal NOSES with conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection (LA) in elderly colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. A retrospective analysis from the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University between 2013 and 2017 was performed. Outcomes related to surgery, body image, quality of life, anal function and long-term survival were compared between the two groups with the propensity-score matching (PSM) method. After PSM, 78 patients were successfully compared. Patients with NOSES had faster gastrointestinal function recovery (P = 0.028), less postoperative complications (P = 0.025), lower pain scores on days 1, 3 and 5 after surgery (P < 0.001). The body image score (P < 0.001) and cosmetic score (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the NOSES group than the LA group at 1 month after surgery. Patients with NOSES posed better global health status (P < 0.001), role function (P = 0.009), emotional function (P = 0.011) and social function (P = 0.011) at 3 months after surgery. Moreover, NOSES showed non inferiority in anal function 6 months after surgery. No significant difference could be found regarding to overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence (LR) and distant metastasis (DM). In elderly CRC patients, NOSES harbored favorable postoperative outcomes, excellent cosmetic properties and better quality of life. Besides, anal function and long-term outcomes of NOSES can be sure for elderly patients.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLaparoscopyNatural Orifice Endoscopic SurgeryRectal NeoplasmsAgedHumansPropensity ScoreQuality of LifeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeColorectal cancerElderly patientsNatural orifice specimen extraction surgerySurvival

Identifiers

PMID34370279
OpenAlexW3189212175

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.