ArticleBJS open2022
Impact of rectal washout on recurrence and survival after anterior resection for rectal cancer.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy affect exfoliated cancer cells in colorectal cancer?BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Development of novel rectal/uterine clamping device.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Impact of rectal washout in local recurrence: a meta-analysis and systemic review.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2024Article
- Trends of colorectal cancer surgery in 2022.BJS open · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRectal washout (RW) is routinely performed during anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer to reduce local recurrence (LR), although is sometimes not performed during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedures due to technical challenges and time consumption. The aim was to investigate the impact of RW on the oncological outcome after AR for rectal cancer in a registry cohort.
methodsData on patients registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry who had undergone elective radical (R0) AR for TNM stage I-III rectal cancer between 2007 and 2017 with a 3-year follow-up were analysed. Multivariable analyses were performed and the primary endpoint was LR at 3 and 5 years after AR. The occurrence of distant metastasis (DM) and overall recurrence (OAR), overall survival, and relative survival were also analysed as a secondary aim. A subgroup analysis was performed for the same outcomes in patients treated with MIS.
resultsOut of 6186 patients (1923 with TNM stage I, 1907 with TNM stage II, and 2356 with TNM stage III), RW was performed in 5706 (92.2 per cent). The median age of the cohort was 67 years. RW did not impact the 3-year risk of LR. LR within 5 years occurred in 104 of 4583 patients (2.3 per cent) in the RW group compared with 16 of 408 patients (3.9 per cent) in the no RW group (P = 0.037). In multivariable analysis of the LR risk, the HR was 0.53 (95 per cent c.i. 0.31 to 0.90), favouring RW. There were no differences in rates of DM and OAR, overall survival, and relative survival. A subgroup analysis of the 1410 patients undergoing MIS did not demonstrate any differences between the groups, given, however, the low rate of LR.
conclusionsRW in AR for rectal cancer does not impact the 3-year oncological outcome; however, after the 5-year follow-up a reduction in LR risk was observed after RW.
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.