ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in segmental resections for colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study of 328 patients.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic Segmental Resection of the Splenic Flexure and Mid-Transverse Colon for Malignancy Treatment: A Systematic Review of Operative Techniques, Anastomotic Approaches, and Surgical and Oncological Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Clinical Outcomes after Intracorporeal versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy for Colon Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Short-term Outcomes of Robotic Left Colectomy Reconstructed by Intracorporeal Overlap Anastomosis for Left-sided Colon Cancer: A Single-center Report from Japan.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) technique possibly results in enhanced recovery and reduced morbidity rates compared to the extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) technique. This study compared the short-term morbidity rates of IA versus EA in segmental resections for colon cancer.
methodWe performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients from 2015 to 2020 using the IA or EA technique at a single Danish colorectal center. Comparative outcomes of interest were surgical efficacy and short-term morbidity rates. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis of clinically relevant outcomes was conducted to explore potential baseline confounding.
resultsWe included 328 patients, 129 in the EA and 199 in the IA groups. There was no significant difference in preoperative baseline characteristics between the two groups. The rate of overall surgical (16% in both groups, p = 1.000) and medical complications (EA: 25 (19%) vs. IA: 27 (14%), p = 0.167) was comparable for both groups. The IA technique did not cause a reduction in operative time (EA: 127.0 min [103.0-171.0] vs. IA: 134.0 min [110.0-164.0], p = 0.547). The IPTW analysis indicated that having an IA caused a reduction in the rate of major surgical complications (RRR
conclusionAdopting IA for colon cancer resulted in similar overall morbidity rates without increasing the duration of the surgical procedure compared to EA. The IA technique had a probable protective effect against developing severe surgical complications. However, this must be interpreted cautiously, limited by the retrospective study design.
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.