Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36632126›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2022

Real-time

Jie Tan, Hong-Li Ji, Yao-Wen Hu, Zhi-Ming Li, Bao-Xiong Zhuang, Hai-Jun Deng, Ya-Nan Wang, Ji-Xiang Zheng, Wei Jiang, Jun Yan

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 50% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Diagnosis of malignancy in oropharyngeal confocal laser endomicroscopy using GPT 4.0 with vision.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jie TanDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Hong-Li JiDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Yao-Wen HuDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Zhi-Ming LiDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Bao-Xiong ZhuangDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Hai-Jun DengDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Ya-Nan WangDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Ji-Xiang ZhengDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Wei JiangDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Jun YanDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China.
Nanfang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) allows patients with ultralow rectal cancer to be treated with sphincter-saving surgery. However, accurate delineation of the distal resection margin (DRM), which is essential to achieve R0 resection for low rectal cancer in TaTME, is technically demanding.

aimTo assess the feasibility of optical biopsy using probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) to select the DRM during TaTME for low rectal cancer.

methodsA total of 43 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with low rectal cancer and scheduled for TaTME were prospectively enrolled from January 2019 to January 2021. pCLE was used to determine the distal edge of the tumor as well as the DRM during surgery. The final pathological report was used as the gold standard. The diagnostic accuracy of pCLE examination was calculated.

resultsA total of 86 pCLE videos of 43 patients were included in the analyses. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of real-time pCLE examination were 90.00% [95% confidence interval (CI): 76.34%-97.21%], 86.96% (95%CI: 73.74%-95.06%) and 88.37% (95%CI: 79.65%-94.28%), respectively. The accuracy of blinded pCLE reinterpretation was 86.05% (95%CI: 76.89%-92.58%). Furthermore, our results show satisfactory interobserver agreement (κ = 0.767, standard error = 0.069) for the detection of cancer tissue by pCLE. There were no positive DRMs (≤ 1 mm) in this study. The median DRM was 7 mm [interquartile range (IQR) = 5-10 mm]. The median Wexner score was 5 (IQR = 3-6) at 6 mo after stoma closure.

conclusionReal-time

Indexed as

Distal resection marginLow rectal cancerOptical biopsyProbe-based confocal laser endomicroscopyTransanal total mesorectal excision

Identifiers

PMID36632126
PMCPMC9827574
OpenAlexW4312198334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.