ArticleDigestive surgery2024
Pathologic Outcomes and Survival in Patients with Rectal Cancer and Increased Body Mass Index.
Article in Digestive surgery, 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.
- Unveiling the impact of body mass index on surgical difficulty and oncological prognosis in low rectal cancer: post-hoc analysis of the LASRE trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Trial
- The Impact of Obesity on Operative Outcomes and Long-Term Oncological Outcomes Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
introductionWe assessed the association between increased body mass index (BMI) and rectal cancer outcomes.
methodsWe included patients who underwent surgery for stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who were divided according to BMI at diagnosis: ideal BMI (18.5-24.9 kg/m2) and increased BMI (≥25 kg/m2). Groups were compared using univariate association analyses relative to baseline characteristics, pathologic outcomes, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Main outcome measures involved circumferential resection margin (CRM), pathologic TNM stage, total mesorectal incision (TME) grade, OS, and DFS.
results243 patients (64.6% male; median age 59 years) with a median BMI of 26.3 kg/m2 were included. 62.1% had BMI ≥25 kg/m2. Increased BMI patients had similar proportions of males (66.9% vs. 60.9%; p = 0.407) and comorbidities (ASA III: 47% vs. 37.4%; p = 0.24) to ideal BMI patients. There were no significant differences in cN1-2 stage (p = 0.279) or positive CRM (p = 0.062) rates. The groups had similar complete/near-complete TME, pathologic TN stage, and survival rates. Pathologic and survival outcomes were also similar with a BMI cutoff of 30.
conclusionsThere was a trend toward more nodal involvement in preoperative assessment and less CRM involvement in the final pathology of patients with increased BMI. Complete/near-complete TME and survival rates were comparable between the groups.
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.