ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2024
Comparative analysis of organ preservation attempt and radical surgery in clinical T2N0 mid to low rectal cancer.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological Distress and Quality of Life in Patients with Laryngeal Cancer: A Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluating organ preservation strategies versus radical surgery in T2N0 rectal cancer: survival outcomes and tumor size impact.International journal of colorectal disease · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDebate persists regarding the feasibility of adopting an organ-preserving strategy as the treatment modality for clinical T2N0 rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of attempting organ-preserving strategies versus radical surgery in patients with clinical T2N0 mid to low rectal cancer.
methodsPatients diagnosed with clinical T2N0 rectal cancer, with lesions located within 8 cm from the anal verge as determined by pre-treatment magnetic resonance imaging between January 2010 and December 2020 were included.
resultsOf 119 patients, 91 and 28 were categorized into the organ-preserving attempt group and the radical surgery group, respectively. The median follow-up duration was 48.8 months (range, 0-134 months). The organ-preserving attempt group exhibited a reduced incidence of stoma formation (44.0% vs. 75.0%; p = 0.004) and a lower occurrence of grade 3 or higher surgical complications (5.8% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.025). Univariate analyses revealed no significant association between treatment strategy and 3-year local recurrence-free survival (organ-preserving attempt 87.9% vs. radical surgery 96.2%; p = 0.129), or 3-year disease-free survival (79.6% vs. 84.9%; p = 0.429). Multivariate analysis did not identify any independent prognostic factors associated with oncologic outcomes.
conclusionCompared with radical surgery, attempted organ preservation resulted in lower incidences of stoma formation and severe surgical complications, whereas oncological outcomes were comparable. Attempting organ preservation may be a safe alternative to radical surgery for clinical T2N0 mid to low rectal cancer.
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.