ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2022
Comparison of clinical efficacy and postoperative inflammatory response between laparoscopic and open radical resection of colorectal cancer.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Article
- Effect and clinical significance of bilateral thoracic paravertebral block combined with S-ketamine on laparoscopic radical surgery for colorectal cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer in older patients and its effects on inflammatory factors.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Isolated metachronous splenic metastasis after rectal cancer surgery: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Comparing the effects of laparoscopic radical surgery and traditional open surgery on short-term efficacy and long-term survival in patients with colorectal cancer.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Clinical effect of laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer based on propensity score matching.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased annually, which has seriously threatened the health and quality of life of patients. In the treatment of CRC, both laparoscopic and radical resection are widely used.
aimTo explore and discuss clinical efficacy and postoperative inflammatory response of laparoscopic and open radical resection of CRC.
methodsA total of 96 patients with CRC diagnosed in our hospital from March 2016 to April 2021 were selected, and were divided into the study group (
resultsThe operation time in the study group was (186.18 ± 33.54 min), which was longer than that of the control group (129.38 ± 26.83 min), but the intraoperative blood loss (111.34 ± 21.45 mL), recovery time of gastrointestinal function (25.35 ± 4.55 h), and hospital stay (10.09 ± 2.38 d) were better than those in the control group (163.77 ± 32.41 mL, 36.06 ± 7.13 h, 13.51 ± 3.66 d) (
conclusionLaparoscopic radical resection of CRC can reduce surgical trauma, inflammatory response and pain stress caused by surgery, which shortens rehabilitation of patients, with a low incidence of complications.
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.