Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35119510›Full record

Observational studyWorld journal of surgery2022

Clinical Utility and Characteristics of the LARS Score Compared to the CCIS.

Emi Akizuki, Kenji Okita, Ai Noda, Tetsuhiro Tsuruma, Hidefumi Nishimori, Kenichi Sasaki, Masami Kimura, Toshihiko Nishidate, Koichi Okuya, Atsushi Hamabe and 2 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in World journal of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Evaluation and Management.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2026
    Review
  2. Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

12 authors.

Emi AkizukiDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5113-4701
Kenji OkitaDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan.
Ai NodaOtaru Ekisaikai Hospital, Hokkaido, Japan.
Tetsuhiro TsurumaJR Sapporo Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Hidefumi NishimoriSapporo Dohto Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Kenichi SasakiMuroran City General Hospital, Hokkaido, Japan.
Masami KimuraSaiseikai Otaru Hospital, Hokkaido, Japan.
Toshihiko NishidateDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan.
Koichi OkuyaDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan.
Atsushi HamabeDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan.
Masayuki IshiiDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan.
Ichiro TakemasaDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Sapporo Medical University, S-1, W-17, Chuo-ku, Sapporo, 060-8556, Japan. itakemasa@sapmed.ac.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score (LS) has been widely validated and has become an international tool for evaluating postoperative bowel dysfunction. However, many physicians still use the conventional incontinence scores in LARS treatment. Moreover, interpretation of LS and its relationship with conventional incontinence scores are not yet well understood. Here we compared the LS with the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS) to clarify the clinical utility and characteristics of the LARS score.

methodsWe performed a multicentre observational study, recruiting 246 rectal cancer patients following sphincter-preserving surgery. Patients completed the LS, CCIS, and SF36 questionnaires.

resultsThe response rate was 76.4%, and a total of 180 patients were analysed. The LS was strongly correlated with the CCIS (P < 0.001, rs = 0.727). However, among 116 patients determined to not have incontinence (CCIS 0-5), 51 (44%) were diagnosed with LARS (29 with minor LARS and 22 with major LARS). Among 68 patients without LARS, only 3 were diagnosed as having incontinence (CCIS > 6). In comparison with background factors, aging and elapsed time were associated with only LS. High LS and CCIS both showed significant quality-of-life impairment as assessed by the SF-36.

conclusionThis is the first study to determine the difference in the numeric values between the CCIS and LS. The LS can be a convenient tool for LARS screening, identifying a wide range of patients with LARS, including those with incontinence evaluated by CCIS. Assessment using the CCIS may often underestimate LARS.

Indexed as

Postoperative ComplicationsRectal NeoplasmsHumansQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesSyndrome

Identifiers

PMID35119510

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.