ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024
Emergency Resection for Colonic Cancer Has an Independent and Unfavorable Effect on Long-Term Oncologic Outcome.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emergency Surgery Independently Predicts Postoperative Recurrence in Patients with Pathologic T3N0M0 Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Colonic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Resection in Obstructive Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review of Surgical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The Influence of Surgeons' Gender on Surgical Outcomes in Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: A Japanese Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Lipid profile-based prognostic nomograms for obstructive colorectal cancer: multi-cohort development and validation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Towards safer colorectal surgery worldwide: Outcomes and benchmarks from the ESCP CORREA 2022 audit.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Oncologic Surgical Emergencies: A Retrospective Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Timing and Frequency of Surveillance Colonoscopies After Resection for Colorectal Cancer in Queensland, Australia: A Retrospective 10-Year Analysis.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- A comparative analysis of preoperative, intraoperative, and tumor characteristics in emergency and elective right-sided colonic surgery.Turkish journal of surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLong-term outcomes in patients undergoing emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain controversial. This study aims to assess short- and long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective CRC surgery.
methodsIn this single-center retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing emergency or elective colonic resections for CRC from January 2013 to December 2017 were included. Primary outcome was long-term survival. As secondary outcomes, we sought to analyze potential differences on postoperative morbidity and concerning the oncological standard of surgical resection. The Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare survival between the groups.
resultsOverall, 225 CRC patients were included. Of these 192 (85.3%) had an elective and 33 (14.7%) an emergency operation. Emergency indications were due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Patients in the emergency group had higher ASA score (p = 0.023), higher Charlsson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.012), and were older than those in the elective group, with median age 70 (IQR 63-79) years and 78 (IQR 68-83) years, for elective and emergency, respectively (p = 0.020). No other preoperative differences were observed. Patients in the emergency group experienced significantly more major complications (12.1% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.037), more anastomotic leakage (12.1% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001), need for reoperation (12.1% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.021), and postoperative mortality (2 patients vs. 0, p < 0.001). No differences in terms of final pathological stage, nor in accuracy of lymphadenectomy were observed. Overall survival was significantly worse in case of emergency operation, with estimated median 41 months vs. not reached in elective cases (p < 0.001). At the multivariate analysis, emergency operation was confirmed as independent unfavorable determinant of survival (with hazard rate HR = 1.97, p = 0.028), together with age (HR = 1.05, p < 0.001), postoperative major morbidity (HR = 3.18, p = 0.012), advanced stage (HR = 5.85, p < 0.001), and need for transfusion (HR = 2.10, p = 0.049).
conclusionPostoperative morbidity and mortality were increased in emergency versus elective CRC resections. Despite no significant differences in terms of accuracy of resection and pathological stages, overall survival was significantly worse in patients who underwent emergency procedure, and independent of other determinants of survival.
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.