ArticleJAMA oncology2022
Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in JAMA oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01899547 (Laparoscopy-Assisted Surgery for Carcinoma of the Low Rectum), which is not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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.
Laparoscopy-Assisted Surgery for Carcinoma of the Low Rectum : A Prospective, Multi-Center, Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel Group, Non-Inferiority Clinical Trial
Who cites it
57 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodological challenges in surgical randomized trials: systematic review of rectal cancer studies.BJS open · 2026Pooled it
- R0 Resection Rates in Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pelvic Exenteration for Colorectal Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- "Textbook outcome(s)" in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Irish journal of medical science · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of intraoperative anastomotic reinforcement suture on the prevention of anastomotic leakage of double-stapling anastomosis for laparoscopic rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Short- and Long-term Outcomes of 3-Row Vs 2-Row Circular Staplers for Low Colorectal Anastomosis After Total Mesorectal Excision: A Single-Center, Randomized, Single-Blind, Phase III Trial (THREESTAPLER Study).Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2026Trial
- Comparative Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Early-Onset Low Rectal Cancer: 3-Year Results From the LASRE Trial.World journal of surgery · 2026Trial
- Unveiling the impact of body mass index on surgical difficulty and oncological prognosis in low rectal cancer: post-hoc analysis of the LASRE trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Trial
- Textbook outcome in low rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic or open surgery: 3-year results from the multicentric LASRE Trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Trial
- Robot-assisted radical resection of colorectal cancer using the KangDuo surgical robot versus the da Vinci Xi robotic system: short-term outcomes of a multicentre randomised controlled noninferiority trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Trial
- Impacts of neoadjuvant therapy on subsequent surgical difficulty, safety, and outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer: a narrative review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- Abdominal-Based Flap Reconstruction After Minimally Invasive and Open Abdominoperineal Resection: An Evaluation of 1006 Patients.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Comparing the Oncologic and Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Prevention, Recognition, and Management of Anastomotic Leakage and Pelvic Sepsis After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Structured Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparing the safety and efficacy of virtual ileostomy versus diverting ileostomy in patients undergoing total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a propensity-matched study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Machine learning model for predicting a high comprehensive complication index following rectal cancer surgery.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence real-time overall recognition model for total mesorectal excision.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Efficacy of laparoscopic versus open surgery in malnourished patients with colorectal cancer.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- A risk prediction model for overall and Grade C anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes and quality of life for robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with mid-low rectal cancer: a multicenter cohort study with inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Effect of Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) quality on 3-year overall survival in low rectal cancer based on the LASRE trial.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
30 authors at 18 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The efficacy of laparoscopic vs open surgery for patients with low rectal cancer has not been established. Objective: To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for treatment of low rectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted in 22 tertiary hospitals across China. Patients scheduled for curative-intent resection of low rectal cancer were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to undergo laparoscopic or open surgery. Between November 2013 and June 2018, 1070 patients were randomized to laparoscopic (n = 712) or open (n = 358) surgery. The planned follow-up was 5 years. Data analysis was performed from April 2021 to March 2022. Interventions: Eligible patients were randomized to receive either laparoscopic or open surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The short-term outcomes included pathologic outcomes, surgical outcomes, postoperative recovery, and 30-day postoperative complications and mortality. Results: A total of 1039 patients (685 in laparoscopic and 354 in open surgery) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median [range] age, 57 [20-75] years; 620 men [59.7%]; clinical TNM stage II/III disease in 659 patients). The rate of complete mesorectal excision was 85.3% (521 of 685) in the laparoscopic group vs 85.8% (266 of 354) in the open group (difference, -0.5%; 95% CI, -5.1% to 4.5%; P = .78). The rate of negative circumferential and distal resection margins was 98.2% (673 of 685) vs 99.7% (353 of 354) (difference, -1.5%; 95% CI, -2.8% to 0.0%; P = .09) and 99.4% (681 of 685) vs 100% (354 of 354) (difference, -0.6%; 95% CI, -1.5% to 0.5%; P = .36), respectively. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 13.0 vs 12.0 (difference, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.1-1.9; P = .39). The laparoscopic group had a higher rate of sphincter preservation (491 of 685 [71.7%] vs 230 of 354 [65.0%]; difference, 6.7%; 95% CI, 0.8%-12.8%; P = .03) and shorter duration of hospitalization (8.0 vs 9.0 days; difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.3; P = .008). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications rate between the 2 groups (89 of 685 [13.0%] vs 61 of 354 [17.2%]; difference, -4.2%; 95% CI, -9.1% to -0.3%; P = .07). No patient died within 30 days. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of patients with low rectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery performed by experienced surgeons was shown to provide pathologic outcomes comparable to open surgery, with a higher sphincter preservation rate and favorable postoperative recovery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01899547.
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.