ArticleBMC surgery2024
A novel perineal exposure method in laparoscopic abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer: a case series study.
Article in BMC 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAbdominal perineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer, also known as Mile's procedure, is a classic procedure for the treatment of rectal cancer. Through the improvement of surgical skills and neoadjuvant therapy, the sphincter-preserving rate in rectal cancer patients has improved, even in patients with ultralow rectal cancer who underwent APR in the past. However, APR cannot be completely replaced by low anterior resection (LAR) in reality. APR still has its indications, when the tumor affects the external sphincter, etc. Good perineal exposure in APR is difficult and can seriously affect surgical safety and the long-term prognosis.
methodsWe reviewed the records of 16 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent APR at Anqing Municipal Hospital from January 2022 to April 2023, including 11 males and 5 females, with an average age of 64.8 ± 10.3 years. The perineal operation was completed with the Lone-Star® retractor-assisted (LSRA) exposure method. After incising the skin and subcutaneous tissue, a Lone-Star® retractor was placed, and the incision was retracted in surrounding directions with 8 small retractors, which facilitated the freeing of deep tissues. We dynamically adjusted the retractor according to the plane to fully expose the surgical field.
resultsAll 16 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted APR successfully. Thirteen procedures were performed independently by a single person, and the others were completed by two persons due to intraoperative arterial hemostasis. All specimens were free of perforation and had a negative circumferential resection margin (CRM). Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients, including urinary retention in 1 patient, pulmonary infection in 1 patient, intestinal adhesion in 1 patient and peristomal dermatitis in 1 patient, and were graded as ClavienDindo grade 3 or lower and cured. No distant metastasis or local recurrence was found for any of the patients in the postoperative follow-up.
conclusionsThe application of the LSRA exposure method might be helpful for perineal exposure during APR for rectal cancer, which could improve intraoperative safety and surgical efficiency, achieve one-person operation, and increase the comfort of operators.
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.