ReviewCancers2021
Anus-Preserving Surgery in Advanced Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: A Perspective on Oncological Safety of Intersphincteric Resection.
Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modified Albert-Lembert coloanal anastomosis with diverting ileostomy versus Turnbull-Cutait pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis after intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a single-center retrospective comparative study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy using the da Vinci SP system: a multi-center cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the patient self-advocacy scale among colorectal cancer patients.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Case Report: Sufficient pelvic floor muscle function can retain acceptable postoperative defecation function afterFrontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Long-term efficacy and short-term outcomes of intersphincteric resectionWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Long-term functional and prognostic outcomes of robotic intersphincteric resection for treating low rectal cancer: a single-center retrospective study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- The Review of Modified Intersphincteric Resection in the Treatment of Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for patients with low rectal cancer: Short-term outcomes.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional printing for preoperative rehearsal and intraoperative navigation during laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery with left colic artery preservation.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Analysis of the correlation between defunctioning stoma and postoperative low anterior resection syndrome in rectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparing total mesorectal excision with partial mesorectal excision for proximal rectal cancer: evaluating postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluating the clinical application and effect of acupuncture therapy in anal function rehabilitation after low-tension rectal cancer surgery.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Treatment of side limb full-thickness prolapse of the side-to-end coloanal anastomosis following intersphincteric resection: a case report and review of literature.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Article
- Robotic Approach to Paediatric Gastrointestinal Diseases: A Systematic Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving resections have similar peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes in female patients with rectal cancer.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Robotic male and laparoscopic female sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer share similar specimen quality, complication rates and long-term oncological outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The surgical management of low-lying rectal cancer, within 5 cm from the anal verge (AV), is challenging due to the possibility, or not, to preserve the anus with its sphincter muscles maintaining oncological safety. The standardization of total mesorectal excision, the adoption of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the implementation of rectal magnetic resonance imaging, and the evolution of mechanical staplers have increased the rate of anus-preserving surgeries. Moreover, extensive anatomy and physiology studies have increased the understanding of the complexity of the deep pelvis. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) was introduced nearly three decades ago as the ultimate anus-preserving surgery. The definition and indication of ISR have changed over time. The adoption of the robotic platform provides excellent perioperative results with no differences in oncological outcomes. Pushing the boundaries of anus-preserving surgeries has risen doubts on oncological safety in order to preserve function. This review critically discusses the oncological safety of ISR by evaluating the anatomical characteristics of the deep pelvis, the clinical indications, the role of distal and circumferential resection margins, the role of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the outcomes between surgical approaches (open, laparoscopic, and robotic), the comparison with abdominoperineal resection, the risk factors for oncological outcomes and local recurrence, the patterns of local recurrences after ISR, considerations on functional outcomes after ISR, and learning curve and surgical education on ISR.
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.