ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2021
Perioperative Outcomes Following Combined Versus Isolated Colorectal and Liver Resections:
Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Our objective was to compare outcomes following combined versus isolated resections for metastatic colorectal cancer and/or liver metastases using a large, contemporary national database. Background: Controversy persists regarding optimal timing of resections in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases. Methods: We analyzed 11,814 patients with disseminated colorectal cancer and/or liver metastases who underwent isolated colon, rectal, or liver resections (CRs, RRs, or LRs) or combined colon/liver or rectal/liver resections (CCLRs or CRLRs) in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Use File (2011-2015). We examined associations between resection type and outcomes using univariate/multivariate analyses and used propensity adjustment to account for nonrandom receipt of isolated versus combined resections. Results: Two thousand four hundred thirty-seven (20.6%); 2108 (17.8%); and 6243 (52.8%) patients underwent isolated CR, RR, or LR; 557 (4.7%) and 469 (4.0%) underwent CCLR or CRLR. Three thousand three hundred ninety-five patients (28.7%) had serious complications (SCs). One hundred forty patients (1.2%) died, of which 113 (80.7%) were failure to rescue (FTR). One thousand three hundred eighty-six (11.7%) patients experienced unplanned readmission. After propensity adjustment and controlling for procedural complexity, wound class, and operation year, CCLR/CRLR was independently associated with increased risk of SC, as well as readmission (compared with LR). CCLR was also independently associated with increased risk of FTR and death (compared with LR). Conclusions: Combined resection uniformly confers increased risk of SC and increased risk of mortality after CCLR; addition of colorectal to LR increases risk of readmission. Combined resections are less safe, and potentially more costly, than isolated resections. Effective strategies to prevent SC after combined resections are warranted.
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.