ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
International survey among surgeons on the perioperative management of rectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect and influencing factors of early ileostomy closure 2-4 weeks on patients with rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- The SAGES MASTERS Program: top 10 papers on intracorporeal anastomosis in right colectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Laparoscopic right colectomies with intracorporeal compared to extracorporeal anastomotic techniques are associated with reduced post-operative incisional hernias.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Safe implementation of robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- International survey among surgeons on the perioperative management of rectal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral pivotal studies and international guidelines on the perioperative management of rectal cancer have been published. However, little is known about the current state of perioperative management of rectal cancer patients in clinical practice worldwide.
methodsAn online survey including 13 questions focusing on key topics related to the perioperative management of patients with rectal cancer was conducted among colorectal surgeons registered within the database of the Research Institute Against Digestive Cancer (IRCAD).
resultsA total of 535 respondents from 89 countries participated in the survey. Most surgeons worked in the European region (40.9%). Two hundred and fifty-four respondents (47.5%) performed less than 25% of surgical procedures laparoscopically. The most commonly used definition of the upper limit of the rectum was a fixed distance from the anal verge (23.4%). Magnetic resonance imaging was used to define the upper limit of the rectum by 258 respondents (48.2%). During total mesorectal excision (TME), 301 respondents (56.3%) used a high-tie technique. The most commonly constructed anastomosis was an end-to-end anastomosis (68.2%) with the majority of surgeons performing a leak test intraoperatively (88.9%). A total of 355 respondents (66.4%) constructed a diverting ostomy, and the majority of these surgeons constructed an enterostomy (82%). A total of 208 respondents (39.3%) closed a stoma within 8 weeks. Lastly, 135 respondents (25.2%) introduced a solid diet on postoperative day 1.
conclusionThere is considerable heterogeneity in the perioperative management of rectal cancer patients worldwide with several discrepancies between current international practice and recommendations from international guidelines. To achieve worldwide standardization in rectal cancer care, further research is needed to elucidate the cause of this heterogeneity and find ways of improved implementation of best practice recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36258001What 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.