Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38860990›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2024

Minimally invasive approach for retrorectal tumors above and below S3: a multicentric tertiary center retrospective study (MiaRT study).

T Bardol, R Souche, C Druet, M M Bertrand, C Ferrandis, M Prudhomme, F Borie, J-M Fabre

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
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

8 authors.

T Bardol *Digestive and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Montpellier University Hospital, University of Montpellier-Nîmes, 641 Avenue du Doyen Gaston Giraud, 34090, Montpellier, France. t-bardol@chu-montpellier.fr.
R Souche *Digestive and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Montpellier University Hospital, University of Montpellier-Nîmes, 641 Avenue du Doyen Gaston Giraud, 34090, Montpellier, France.
C DruetDepartment of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Nîmes University Hospital, Montpellier-Nîmes University, Montpellier, France.
M M BertrandDepartment of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Nîmes University Hospital, Montpellier-Nîmes University, Montpellier, France.
C FerrandisDigestive and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Montpellier University Hospital, University of Montpellier-Nîmes, 641 Avenue du Doyen Gaston Giraud, 34090, Montpellier, France.
M PrudhommeDepartment of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Nîmes University Hospital, Montpellier-Nîmes University, Montpellier, France.
F BorieDepartment of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Nîmes University Hospital, Montpellier-Nîmes University, Montpellier, France.
J-M FabreDigestive and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Montpellier University Hospital, University of Montpellier-Nîmes, 641 Avenue du Doyen Gaston Giraud, 34090, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetrorectal tumors are uncommon lesions developed in the retrorectal space. Data on their minimally invasive resection are scarce and the optimal surgical approach for tumors below S3 remains debated.

methodsWe performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive resection of retrorectal tumors between 2005 and 2022 at two tertiary university hospital centers, by comparing the results obtained for lesions located above or below S3.

resultsOf over 41 patients identified with retrorectal tumors, surgical approach was minimally invasive for 23 patients, with laparoscopy alone in 19, with transanal excision in 2, and with combined approach in 2. Retrorectal tumor was above S3 in 11 patients (> S3 group) and below S3 in 12 patients (< S3 group). Patient characteristics and median tumor size were not significantly different between the two groups (60 vs 67 mm; p = 0.975). Overall median operative time was 131.5 min and conversion rate was 13% without significant difference between the two groups (126 vs 197 min and 18% vs 8%, respectively; p > 0.05). Final pathology was tailgut cyst (48%), schwannoma (22%), neural origin tumor (17%), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (4%), and other (19%). The 90-day complication rates were 27% and 58% in the > S3 and < S3 groups, respectively, without severe morbidity or mortality. After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, no recurrence was observed in both groups. Three patients presented chronic pain, three anal dysfunction, and three urinary dysfunction. All were successfully managed without reintervention.

conclusionsMinimally invasive surgery for retrorectal tumors can be performed safely and effectively with low morbidity and no mortality. Laparoscopic and transanal techniques alone or in combination may be recommended as the treatment of choice of benign retrorectal tumors, even for lesions below S3, in centers experienced with minimally invasive surgery.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRectal NeoplasmsTertiary Care CentersAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRectumRetrospective StudiesTransanal Endoscopic SurgeryTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopy: TAMISMinimally invasive surgeryRetrorectal tumorsTailgut cyst

Identifiers

PMID38860990
PMCPMC11166785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.