ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery2024
Surgical effect and gastrointestinal functional recovery of laparoscopic-guided total mesorectal excision in patients with rectal cancer.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo explore the surgical effect and gastrointestinal functional recovery of laparoscopic-guided total mesorectal excision (LGTME) in patients with rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 150 rectal cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital from July 2022 to July 2023 were selected and randomly divided into two groups using a random number table. There were 75 cases in the control group (CG) who underwent traditional open rectal total mesorectal excision surgery and 75 cases in the experimental group (EG) who underwent LGTME. The surgical effects of the two groups were compared, and the gastrointestinal and anal functional recovery of the two groups were compared before and after treatment.
resultsIntraoperative bleeding, incision length, time to initial feeding and time to anal exhaust in the EG were significantly lower than those in the CG ( P < 0.05). Before treatment, there was no significant difference in gastrointestinal function and anal function between the two groups ( P > 0.05). After treatment, the levels of motilin, gastrin, neuropeptide Y and basic fibroblast growth factor in the EG were significantly higher than those in the CG, with statistical significance ( P < 0.05); the maximum anal systolic pressure and resting anal sphincter pressure in the EG were significantly lower than those in the CG ( P < 0.05); the rectal sensitivity threshold volume (RSTV) and rectal maximum volume threshold in the EG were significantly higher than those in the CG ( P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in most postoperative complications between the two groups ( P > 0.05).
conclusionLGTME improves the surgical effects of rectal cancer patients, promotes the recovery of gastrointestinal function and has a small effect on anal function indicators, thereby reducing hospital stay.
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.