ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024
Endoscopic Resection of Stage T1 Colorectal Adenocarcinoma Followed by Surgical Intervention: a Single-center Retrospective Study.
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. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDomestic and international guidelines recommend endoscopic resection for stage T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma with indications. However, completion surgery remains imperative for patients exhibiting high-risk factors subsequent to endoscopic procedures.
objectiveTo investigate the evidence, pathological features, and surgical outcomes of completion surgery in patients with T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma following endoscopic resection.
methodsWe retrospectively collect data on the clinical features and treatment outcomes of patients with stage T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma who underwent endoscopic resection followed by surgical resection and those who initially completed surgical intervention at Peking University International Hospital between January 2019 and October 2022, with the aim of assessing the necessity and feasibility of surgical intervention.
resultsSeventeen patients (Group A) with high-risk factors following endoscopic procedure, especially with deep submucosal invasion and vascular or lymphatic invasion, experienced further surgical resection. The median interval between endoscopic resection and completion surgery was 23.71 days ± 15.89. Sixteen patients (Group B) underwent radical resection without any prior interventions. The surgical approach involves integration of laparoscopy and colonoscopy for precise localization and quantitative diagnosis, followed by radical surgery. The two groups demonstrated significant differences statistically with reference to tumor diameter (1.65 cm ± 0.77 vs 3.36 cm ± 1.39, P = 0.000) and the attainment of standard lymph node count (cases of detected lymph nodes larger than or equal to 12, 5 vs 12, P = 0.015). Postoperative complications and hospital stay manifested no significant disparity statistically in two groups. Patients who underwent completion surgery had no inferior outcomes compared with those who underwent direct surgery in terms of 5-year disease-free survival (Log rank test: P = 0.083, Breslow test: P = 0.089). The two groups also exhibited no significant differences statistically in the context of overall survival (Log rank test: P = 0.652, Breslow test: P = 0.758).
conclusionCompletion surgery is a safe and feasible treatment option for T1 colorectal adenocarcinoma patients with high-risk factors, particularly those with deep submucosal invasion and vascular or lymphatic invasion following endoscopic treatment. Furthermore, subsequent treatment should be chosen based on a comprehensive analysis of the patient's history of abdominal surgery, willingness, and pathological features.
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.