Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39028427›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2024

Minimally invasive left colectomy with total intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis. A single center cohort study. Stage 2b IDEAL framework for evaluating surgical innovation.

Xavier Serra-Aracil, Irene Gómez-Torres, Andrea Torrecilla-Portoles, Anna Serracant-Barrera, Albert García-Nalda, Anna Pallisera-Lloveras

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Xavier Serra-AracilDepartment of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Parc Tauli s/n, Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208, Spain. Javier.Serra@uab.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0291-1900
Irene Gómez-TorresDepartment of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Parc Tauli s/n, Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208, Spain. irenegomeztorres@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7248-2390
Andrea Torrecilla-PortolesDepartment of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Parc Tauli s/n, Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208, Spain.
Anna Serracant-BarreraDepartment of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Parc Tauli s/n, Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208, Spain.
Albert García-NaldaDepartment of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Parc Tauli s/n, Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208, Spain.
Anna Pallisera-LloverasDepartment of Surgery, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Parc Tauli s/n, Sabadell, Barcelona, 08208, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePerforming intracorporeal anastomoses in minimally invasive colon surgery appears to provide better short-term outcomes for patients with colon cancer. The aim of the study is to compare surgical aspects and short-term outcomes between intracorporeal and extracorporeal techniques in left colectomies with both laparoscopic and robotic approaches and evaluate advantages and disadvantages of intracorporeal anastomosis according to IDEAL framework (Exploration, stage 2b).

methodsThis is a single center, ambispective cohort study comparing total intracorporeal anastomosis (TIA) and standard surgery with extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). Patients with colon cancer treated by left colectomy, sigmoidectomy and high anterior resection by total intracorporeal anastomosis between May 2020 and January 2023 without exclusion criteria were prospectively included in a standardized database. Short-term outcomes in the group undergoing TIA were compared with a historical EA cohort. The main assessment outcomes were intraoperative complications, postoperative morbidity according to the Clavien-Dindo scale and the comparison of pathological. We conducted a preliminary comparative study within the TIA group between approaches, a primary analysis between the two anastomotic techniques, and a propensity score matched analysis including only the laparoscopic approach, between both anastomotic techniques.

resultsTwo hundred and forty-six patients were included: 103 who underwent TIA, 35 of them with laparoscopic approach and 68 with robotic approach, and a comparison group comprising another 103 eligible consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic EA. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic variables. No statistically significant differences were observed in anastomotic dehiscence. Intraoperative complications are fewer in the TIA group, with a higher C-Reactive Protein levels. Relevant anastomotic bleeding and the number of retrieved lymph nodes were higher in EA group. Nevertheless, no differences were observed in terms of overall morbidity.

conclusionMinimally invasive left colectomy with intracorporeal resection and anastomosis is technically feasible and safe suing either a laparoscopic or a robotic approach. Clinical data from this cohort demonstrate outcomes comparable to those achieved through the conventional EA procedure in relation to postoperative morbidity and oncological efficacy, with indications suggesting that the utilization of robotic-assisted techniques may play a contributing role in enhancing overall treatment outcomes.

Indexed as

Anastomosis, SurgicalColectomyColonic NeoplasmsLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeIntracorporeal anastomosisLeft colectomyMinimally invasive left colectomyRobotic colectomyRobotic left colectomy

Identifiers

PMID39028427
PMCPMC11271420

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.