ArticleCureus2024
Treatment Differences for Splenic Flexure Cancers in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds Colorectal surgeons worldwide have differing opinions on the best way to handle rare cases of splenic flexure colon cancers (SFCs). Although the majority of reviews indicate no significant variation in oncological outcomes among the three different procedure types used to treat SFCs, surgeons still exhibit diversity in their practices. This study determined the treatment preferences of colorectal surgeons in Saudi Arabia. Methods A descriptive cross-sectional study evaluated the management of colorectal surgeons in handling SFC cases. We utilized a validated questionnaire developed by Manceau et al., consisting of 14 questions. Emails and phone numbers of members of the Saudi Society of Colorectal Surgery (SSCRS) were gathered. Google Forms surveys were administered from October 1-30, 2023. Results A response rate of 66% (58/88) was obtained among questioned colorectal surgeons. Their responses revealed that there was no consensus regarding the preferred procedure to treat SFCs. The most common treatment reported was segmental colectomy (SC) 21/58 (36.2%), followed by subtotal colectomy (STC) (19/58, 32.8%) and left hemicolectomy (LHC) (18/58, 31%). There was a strong consensus of 96% (56/58) of the respondents in favor of using stapler anastomosis rather than hand sewing. The frequency of performing SC, STC, and LHC in France was 70%, 13%, and 17%, respectively, compared to 36.2%, 32.8%, and 31% in Saudi Arabia, with a p-value of 0.001. The surgeons' preferred approaches to managing SFCs utilizing laparoscopic, open, or hand-aided in France versus Saudi Arabia were 63%, 31%, and 11%, respectively, compared to 84.5%, 8.6%, and 6.9%, with a p-value of 0.001. Conclusion A significant disparity exists regarding the treatment of SFCs between colorectal surgeons in France and Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, there is a lack of consensus among colorectal surgeons in Saudi Arabia regarding the surgical management of SFCs. Hence, it is imperative for the SCRSS to assemble a panel of experts to reach a consensus for the most appropriate and effective treatment of SFCs.
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.