Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37193915›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2023

Surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of local and radical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for early- and mid-stage rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Shufa Tan, Yan Ou, Shuilan Huang, Qiangqiang Gao

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Surgical treatment of colorectal cancer: A multidimensional review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025
    Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Shufa TanShaanxi University of Chinese Medicine, Shaanxi, China.
Yan OuAffiliated Hospital of Shaanxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shaanxi Province, Deputy No. 2, West Weiyang Road, Xianyang City, 712000, China.
Shuilan HuangShaanxi University of Chinese Medicine, Shaanxi, China.
Qiangqiang GaoAffiliated Hospital of Shaanxi University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shaanxi Province, Deputy No. 2, West Weiyang Road, Xianyang City, 712000, China. gqq3057@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRadical resection is typically the standard treatment for early- and mid-stage rectal cancer as local resection may result in a high rate of recurrence and risk of distant metastasis. A growing number of studies have shown that local excision after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy can significantly reduce recurrence rates and is a feasible strategy to preserve the rectum as an alternative to conventional radical resection.

objectiveThis study aims to compare the efficacy of local resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy with radical surgery for early- and mid-stage rectal cancer and to report the evidence-based clinical advantages of both techniques.

methodsClinical trials comparing oncologic and perioperative outcomes of local and radical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with early- to mid-stage rectal cancer were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web Of Science, and Cochrane databases, and a total of 5 randomized controlled trials and 11 cohort study trials were included.

resultsIn terms of oncology and perioperative outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between the radical resection group and the local resection group in terms of OS [HR = 0.99, 95%CI (0.85, 1.15), p = 0.858], DFS [HR = 1.01, 95%CI (0.64, 1.58), p = 0.967], distant metastasis rate [RR = 0.76, 95%CI (0.36,1.59), p = 0.464], and local recurrence rate [RR = 1.30, 95%CI (0.69, 2.47), p = 0.420]. However, there were significant differences in the outcomes of complications [RR = 0.49, 95% CI (0.33, 0.72), p < 0.001], length of hospital stays [WMD =  - 5.13, 95%CI (- 6.22, - 4.05), p < 0.001], enterostomy [RR = 0.13, 95%CI (0.05, 0.37), p < 0.001], operative time [- 94.31, 95%CI (- 117.26, - 71.35), p < 0.001], and emotional functioning score [WMD = 2.34, 95% CI (0.94, 3.74), p < 0.001].

conclusionLocal resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy may be an effective alternative to radical surgery in patients with early and middle rectal cancer.

Indexed as

Neoadjuvant TherapyRectal NeoplasmsChemoradiotherapyCohort StudiesHumansNeoplasm StagingRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeEarly middle rectal cancerLocal resectionNeoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapyRadical resection

Identifiers

PMID37193915

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.