ArticleBJS open2022
Laparoscopic versus open lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in locally advanced rectal cancer: multicentre retrospective cohort study.
Article in BJS open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary and sexual function after robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Locally-Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Cohort Study Comparing Perioperative Morbidity and Short-Term Oncological Outcomes.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Initial experience and results of robotic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in locally advanced rectal cancer-a single center experience of 17 consecutive procedures.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
- The role of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in advanced rectal cancer: a review of current evidence and outcomes.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Review
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, and open surgery for lateral lymph-node dissection for rectal cancer: a network meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Advancing mid-rectal cancer surgery: Unveiling the potential of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in comparison to conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 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
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) is an option in the treatment of rectal cancer and may reduce local recurrence/improve disease-free survival. Advancements in minimally invasive technology have improved the ability to identify anatomy and neurovascular structures that may help in LPLND. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and oncological safety of laparoscopic LPLND compared with the open LPLND.
methodBetween July 2010 and July 2019, patients from three tertiary referral hospitals who underwent LPLND with total mesorectal excision for primary rectal cancer were included. Baseline patient characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathologic results, recurrence, and survival were compared between the laparoscopic and open groups.
resultsThere were 126 and 70 patients in the laparoscopic and open groups respectively. The laparoscopic group had less estimated blood loss (100 ml versus 300 ml, P < 0.001) and lower transfusion rate (0.8 per cent versus 10.0 per cent; P = 0.003) but longer operating times (318 min versus 270 min, P = 0.004). The laparoscopic group had fewer wound infections (1.6 per cent versus 10.0 per cent, P = 0.011) and neuropathy (0 per cent versus 4.3 per cent, P = 0.044). Lateral pelvic recurrence rate was 7.6 per cent in the laparoscopic group and 19.6 per cent in the open group (P = 0.053). Recurrence-free survival (72.2 per cent versus 63.5 per cent; P = 0.190) and overall survival (93.3 per cent versus 85.0 per cent; P = 0.118) were not significantly different.
conclusionLaparoscopic LPLND was associated with improved perioperative outcomes and non-inferior oncological outcomes.
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.