ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2024
Evolution of surgical approach to rectal cancer resection: A multinational registry assessment.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of treatment patterns and survival outcomes in non-metastatic rectal cancer: a 15-year real-world single-center analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Towards safer colorectal surgery worldwide: Outcomes and benchmarks from the ESCP CORREA 2022 audit.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- Trends and outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter cross-sectional study of minimally invasive versus open techniques in Germany.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSurgical approach to rectal cancer has evolved in recent decades, with introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and local excision. Since implementation might differ internationally, this study is aimed at evaluating trends in surgical approach to rectal cancer across different countries over the last 10 years and to gain insight into patient, tumour and treatment characteristics.
methodsPseudo-anonymised data of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer between 2010 and 2019 were extracted from clinical audits in the Netherlands (NL), Sweden (SE), England-Wales (EW) and Australia-New Zealand (AZ).
resultsNinety-nine thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients were included (38,413 open, 55,155 MIS and 5416 local excision). An overall increase in MIS was observed from 29.9% in 2010 to 72.1% in 2019, with decreasing conversion rates (17.5-9.0%). The MIS proportion was highly variable between countries in the period 2010-2014 (54.4% NL, 45.3% EW, 39.8% AZ, 14.1% SE, P < 0.001), but variation reduced over time (2015-2019 78.8% NL, 66.3% EW, 64.3% AZ, 53.2% SE, P < 0.001). The proportion of local excision for the two periods was highly variable between countries: 4.7% and 11.8% in NL, 3.9% and 7.4% in EW, 4.7% and 4.6% in AZ, 6.0% and 2.9% in SE.
conclusionsApplication and speed of implementation of MIS were highly variable between countries, but each registry demonstrated a significant increase over time. Local excision revealed inconsistent trends over time.
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.