Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35384494›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2022

Laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy versus laparoscopic transverse colectomy for mid-transverse colon cancer: a multicenter retrospective study from Kanagawa Yokohama Colorectal Cancer (KYCC) study group.

Kenta Iguchi, Masakatsu Numata, Manabu Shiozawa, Keisuke Kazama, Sho Sawazaki, Yusuke Katayama, Koji Numata, Sumito Sato, Akio Higuchi, Nobuhiro Sugano and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kenta IguchiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Masakatsu NumataDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan. numata@yokohama-cu.ac.jp.
Manabu ShiozawaDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Keisuke KazamaDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Sho SawazakiDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Yusuke KatayamaDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Koji NumataDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Sumito SatoDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Akio HiguchiDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Nobuhiro SuganoDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan.
Hiroyuki MushiakeDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Yasushi RinoDepartment of Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Yokohama City University · JPKanagawa Cancer CenterKanagawa Prefectural Hospital Organization · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe laparoscopic surgery approach for mid-transverse colon cancer (MTC) varies depending on tumor characteristics and the guidelines implemented by each surgeon; the optimal surgical procedure for MTC has not been established. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy (Lap-ERHC) and laparoscopic transverse colectomy (Lap-TC) for MTC.

methodsThis was a multicenter, retrospective study. We surveyed eight hospitals, by questionnaire, on MTC surgery policies and retrospectively compared the short- and long-term surgical outcomes for patients with MTC who underwent Lap-ERHC or Lap-TC between January 2008 and December 2019.

resultsA total of 129 patients were enrolled, of whom 35 underwent Lap-ERHC and 94 underwent Lap-TC. There were no significant differences in tumor progression between the two groups. Operation time was significantly longer (202 min vs. 185 min, p = 0.026). We observed a higher complication rate (≥ grade 3) in the Lap-ERHC group than in the Lap-TC group (11.4% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.086). Three patients (8.6%) who underwent Lap-ERHC developed anastomotic leakage; none of the patients who underwent Lap-TC had this complication (p = 0.018). The 3-year overall survival rates (stage I: 100% vs. 91.9%, p = 0.64; stage II: 100% vs. 95.5%, p = 0.46; stage III: 100% vs. 88.2%, p = 0.91, respectively) were similar between the two groups.

conclusionLap-ERHC for MTC has the same long-term outcomes as Lap-TC. However, Lap-ERHC for MTC has a higher complication rate. Therefore, Lap-TC may be recommended for patients with MTC.

trial registrationUMIN000042674.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsColon, TransverseLaparoscopyColectomyHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeColorectal cancerLaparoscopyRetrospective cohortRight hemicolectomyTransverse colon

Identifiers

PMID35384494
OpenAlexW4225983351

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.