ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2022
Is Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery Really Safe in Radical Surgery for Colorectal Cancer?
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Which site is better for prophylactic ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery? By the specimen extraction site or new site: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- A randomized controlled trial comparing robotic NOSES versus robotic TME for Mid-rectal cancer: short-term oncological and perioperative outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Trial
- Perioperative safety evaluation of intersphincteric resection combined with rectal eversion and total extra-abdominal resection: a prospective randomized controlled trial.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Trial
- Laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction subtotal colectomy for redundant colon: a retrospective parallel-cohort comparative study with reduced surgical site infections and accelerated recovery.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery for left-sided colorectal resection: A single-centre cohort study.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- Reduced-port laparoscopic right colonic resection with D3 lymph node dissection and transvaginal specimen extraction (NOSES VIIIa) for right colon cancer: clinical features.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Article
- Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus robotic transabdominal specimen extraction surgery for early-stage rectal cancer: a multicenter propensity score-matched analysis (in China).Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic-Assisted Colorectal Resection Can Reduce the Inhibition of Immune Function Compared with Conventional Open Surgery: A Retrospective Clinical Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Feasibility and safety of specimen extractionFrontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The main feature of Methods: Data from 125 patients diagnosed with sigmoid colon, and upper rectal cancer by gastrointestinal surgery in the First Affiliated Hospital of Wannan Medical College from January 2017 to June 2020 were analyzed. Patients were assigned to two surgical groups: Results: The bacterial culture positive rate was not significant in the La-NOSE group (15/50 vs 19/75) than in the CLA group. The Conclusions: Although the incidence of intra-abdominal contamination is high, it does not develop into a severe infectious disease, and does not lead to the implantation of free tumor cells into the abdominal cavity. Therefore, it is safe for the NOSE to treat colorectal cancer.
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.