Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37178402›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2023

"Caudal to cranial" versus "medial to lateral" approach in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision for the treatment of stage II and III colon cancer: perioperative outcomes and 5-year prognosis.

Xiaojiang Yi, Weilin Liao, Bosen Zhu, Xiaochuang Feng, Hongming Li, Chuangqi Chen, Manzhao Ouyang, Dechang Diao

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. 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

8 authors.

Xiaojiang YiThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong Province, China.
Weilin LiaoDepartment of Colorectal (Tumor) Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Bosen ZhuDepartment of Gastroenteroanal Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Zhanjiang, 524002, China.
Xiaochuang FengDepartment of Colorectal (Tumor) Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Hongming LiDepartment of Colorectal (Tumor) Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Chuangqi ChenDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510000, China.
Manzhao OuyangThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong Province, China. doctorken@smu.edu.cn.
Dechang DiaoDepartment of Colorectal (Tumor) Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China. diaodechang223@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the "caudal to cranial" (CC) versus "medial to lateral" (ML) approach for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. Pertinent data from all patients with stage II and III between January 2015 and August 2017 were entered into a retrospective database. A total of 175 patients underwent the ML (N = 109) or CC approach (N = 66). Patient characteristics were equivalent between groups. The CC group showed a shorter surgical time 170.00 (145.00, 210.00) vs. (206.50 (178.75, 226.25) min) than the ML group (p < 0.001). The time to oral intake was shorter in the CC group than in the ML group ((3.00 (1.00, 4.00) vs. 3.00 (2.00, 5.00) days; p = 0.007). For the total harvested lymph nodes, there was no statistical significance between the CC group 16.50 (14.00, 21.25) and the ML group 18.00 (15.00, 22.00) (p = 0.327), and no difference was found in the positive harvested lymph nodes (0 (0, 2.00) vs. 0 (0, 1.50); p = 0.753). Meanwhile, no differences were found in other perioperative or pathological outcomes, including blood loss and complications. For 5-year prognosis, overall survival rates were 75.76% in the CC group and 82.57% in the ML group (HR 0.654, 95% CI 0.336-1.273, p = 0.207); disease-free survival rates were 80.30% in the CC group and 85.32% in the ML group (HR 0.683, 95% CI 0.328-1.422, p = 0.305). Both approaches were safe and feasible and resulted in excellent survival. The CC approach was beneficial in terms of the surgical time and time to oral intake.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsLaparoscopyColectomyHumansLymph Node ExcisionPrognosisRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome5-year prognosisCaudal to cranialLaparoscopic right hemicolectomyMedial to lateral

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.