SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2022
Mid- and low-rectal cancer: laparoscopic vs open treatment-short- and long-term results. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- R0 Resection Rates in Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pelvic Exenteration for Colorectal Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of intraoperative anastomotic reinforcement suture on the prevention of anastomotic leakage of double-stapling anastomosis for laparoscopic rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Early-Onset Low Rectal Cancer: 3-Year Results From the LASRE Trial.World journal of surgery · 2026Trial
- Machine learning for predicting surgical difficulty of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: integrating MR-based pelvimetry and peritoneal reflection.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- A multi-docking strategy for robotic LAR and deep pelvic surgery with the Hugo RAS system: experience from a tertiary referral center.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
- Advantages of robotic surgery for rectal cancer compared to laparoscopic surgery: pelvic anatomy and its impact on urinary dysfunction.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Comparing total mesorectal excision with partial mesorectal excision for proximal rectal cancer: evaluating postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, a propensity score matching cohort study.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Propensity matched analysis of minimally invasive and open radical resection for rectal cancer: comparison of short-term outcomes in elderly/frail patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Safety of robotic surgical management of non-elective colectomies for diverticulitis compared to laparoscopic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: Contemporary Practice, Evidence, and Knowledge Gaps.Oncology and therapy · 2022Article
- Letter to the editor: Not inferior but rather superior long-term disease-free survival after laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for low and mid rectal cancer!International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Article
- A prospective study of specimen eversion to lateral rectum and valgus resection for low rectal cancer.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: The myth of reinventing the wheel.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe laparoscopic approach in the treatment of mid- or low-rectal cancer is still controversial. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic resection of extraperitoneal cancer is associated with improved short-time non-oncological outcomes, although high-level evidence showing similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes is scarce.
objectiveThe aim of our paper is to study the oncological and non-oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of MedLine, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed by combining various key words. STUDY SELECTION: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer were included. The quality of RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane reviewer's handbook. This meta-analysis was based on the recommendation of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. INTERVENTION(S): This study analyzes laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer.
main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were oncological parameters.
resultsFifteen RCTs comprising 4,411 patients matched the selection criteria. Meta-analysis showed a significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery in short-time non-oncological outcomes. Although laparoscopic approach increased operation time, it decreases significantly the blood loss and length of hospital stay. No significant difference was noted regarding short- and long-term oncological outcomes, but 4 and 5 years disease-free survival were statistically higher in the open group. LIMITATIONS: There are still questions about the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer being comparable to the open technique.
conclusionsConsidering that all surgical resections have been performed in high volume centers by expert surgeons, the minimally invasive surgery in patients with extraperitoneal cancer could still be not considered equivalent to open surgery in terms of oncological radicality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34716474What 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.