ArticlePloS one2023
Longitudinal analysis of long-term outcomes of colorectal cancer after laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery: The Shizuoka study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation and analysis of neurocognitive dysfunction in patients with colorectal cancer after radical resection: A retrospective study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong-term cancer prognosis after initial surgical procedures is an unlikely endpoint for clinical trials. Medical claim databases may aid in addressing this issue regardless of limited information on disease and patient background. However, the long-term prognosis (especially regarding long-term care needs) following surgical procedures remains unclear. This study aimed to assess whether long-term outcomes, such as the exacerbation of long-term care needs and mortality, differ with surgical methods.
methodsUsing a longitudinal study with linkage between medical claim and long-term care database, patients with primary colorectal cancer who underwent initial colonoscopies were identified through anonymized data in Japan (Shizuoka Kokuho Database, 2012-2018). Odds ratios (ORs) for long-term outcomes (long-term care needs and all-cause mortality during a 6.5-year follow-up period) were analyzed using logistic regression to compare laparoscopy and endoscopic surgery to laparotomy.
resultsOverall, 3,744 primary colorectal cancer cases (822 laparotomies, 705 laparoscopies, and 2,217 endoscopic surgeries) were included. Compared to the laparotomy group, the crude OR for exacerbation of long-term care needs in the laparoscopic surgery group was 0.376 (95% confidence interval, 0.227, 0.624), while the OR for all-cause mortality was 0.22 (0.329, 0.532).
conclusionThis is the first study to analyze long-term prognosis after surgery for patients with colorectal cancer to combine medical and long-term needs data. As the national health insurance claim database rarely includes information on cancer stage and comorbidities, better prognosis on endoscopic surgery may need careful interpretation. Therefore, laparoscopy has superior outcomes in terms of long-term care needs and mortality compared to those of laparotomy.
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.