Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38438675›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024

Comparison of the short-term surgical outcomes of lateral lymph node dissection for low rectal cancer using a robotic-assisted transabdominal approach alone or supported by a transanal approach.

Takuya Tokunaga, Hideya Kashihara, Kozo Yoshikawa, Toshihiro Nakao, Masaaki Nishi, Chie Takasu, Yuma Wada, Toshiaki Yoshimoto, Mitsuo Shimada

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Takuya TokunagaDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan. tokunaga.takuya@tokushima-u.ac.jp.ORCID 0000-0002-0709-2214
Hideya KashiharaDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Kozo YoshikawaDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Toshihiro NakaoDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Masaaki NishiDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Chie TakasuDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Yuma WadaDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Toshiaki YoshimotoDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Mitsuo ShimadaDepartment of Surgery, Tokushima University, 3-18-15 Kuramoto-cho, Tokushima, 770-8503, Japan.
Tokushima University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLateral lymph node metastases are a major cause of local recurrence after surgery for advanced low rectal cancer. Lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) may reduce the risk of local recurrence in patients with suspected lateral lymph node metastasis. Recent reports have shown that robotic-assisted LLND can help to reduce the postoperative complication rate, such as urinary disturbance. Furthermore, with the advent of transanal total mesorectal excision, a novel LLND procedure that combines a transabdominal approach with a transanal approach has been reported. This study aimed to clarify the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted LLND supported by a transanal approach for advanced low rectal cancer.

methodsThirty-nine patients diagnosed to have low rectal cancer between June 2019 and May 2023 were retrospectively enrolled and divided according to whether they underwent LLND via a robotic-assisted transabdominal approach alone (transabdominal group, n = 19) or in combination with a transanal approach (2team group, n = 20). The patient characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

resultsThe total operation time was significantly shorter in the 2team group than in the transabdominal group (366 min vs. 513 min, P < 0.001), as was the time taken to perform unilateral LLND (64 min vs. 114 min, P < 0.001). Furthermore, there was significantly less intraoperative bleeding in the 2team group (30 mL vs. 80 mL, P = 0.004). There was no significant between-group difference in postoperative complications. The incidence of postoperative urinary disturbance was satisfactory at 5% in both groups.

conclusionsThe operation time for LLND performed by a robotic-assisted transabdominal approach was shortened when supported by a transanal approach. The frequency of postoperative urinary disturbance was low in both groups. Therefore, robotic-assisted abdominal LLND supported by a transanal approach can be considered a promising treatment option for advanced low rectal cancer.

Indexed as

Rectal NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeRectal cancerRobotic-assisted lateral lymph node dissectionTransanal approachTransanal total mesorectal excisionTwo teamsUrinary disturbance

Identifiers

PMID38438675
OpenAlexW4392384040

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.