Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37009370›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

The Accuracy of Different Modalities Used for Preoperative Primary Tumour Localisation in Operated Colorectal Cancer Patients.

Mahmoud Elnaggar, Ponnuthurai Pratheepan, Baskaran Paramagurunathan, Josie Colemeadow, Basim Hussein, Varvara Bashkirova, Kavya Pillai, Lucy Singh, Mehar Chawla

Open access · diamondFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mahmoud ElnaggarColorectal Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Ponnuthurai PratheepanColorectal Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Baskaran ParamagurunathanGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Josie ColemeadowGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Basim HusseinGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Varvara BashkirovaGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Kavya PillaiGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Lucy SinghGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
Mehar ChawlaGeneral Surgery, North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, London, GBR.
North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim Colonoscopy and computed tomography (CT) scans of the abdomen and pelvis are routine pre-operative assessment tools in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. There have been some discrepancies regarding the location of cancer when seen by colonoscopy versus CT scan. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of a colonoscopy with a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis with contrast, which is done routinely before surgery to localise the exact site of the tumour within the large bowel, whilst comparing both to the operative, gross and histopathology findings of the exact location. Methods A retrospective study was carried out on 165 colorectal cancer patients operated on between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014, using electronic hospital records that were reviewed anonymously, comparing the location of cancer within the large bowels as was found on colonoscopy and CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis with contrast, comparing both to post-operative histopathology specimen or intra-operative assessment in cases where no resection of the primary tumour was performed. Results CT and colonoscopy were both accurate in diagnosing 70.5% of cases that had done both investigations pre-operatively. The best results were obtained when the cancer was located in the caecum as confirmed post-operatively; the combined accuracy rate was 100%. CT was accurate, whilst colonoscopy was not in eight (6.2%) cases (all are rectal or sigmoid cancers), and colonoscopy was accurate and CT was not in 12 cases, 10 of them were rectal and two were ascending colonic. Colonoscopy was not performed in 36 (21%) cases for a variety of reasons, including large bowel obstruction or perforation on presentation. In 32 of these cases, CT scan managed to accurately predict the location of cancer (mostly rectal and caecal), and CT scan was inaccurate in 20.6% of cases (34 out of 165), whilst colonoscopy was inaccurate in 13.9% of cases (18 out of 129). Conclusion Colonoscopy is more accurate in localising colorectal cancers than CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis with contrast. CT scan diagnoses regional and distant spread of colorectal cancers such as nodal status, invasion of neighbouring organs and/or peritoneum and the presence of liver metastases, whilst colonoscopy is limited to intraluminal diagnosis but can be both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool, with higher accuracy, in general, in localising colorectal cancers. Both CT scan and colonoscopy were equal in appendicular, caecal, splenic flexure and descending colon cancer localisation accuracy.

Indexed as

colonoscopycolorectal cancercolorectal neoplasiactct accuracyprimary neoplasm location

Identifiers

PMID37009370
PMCPMC10049957
OpenAlexW4361002750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read187
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.