ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024
Outcomes of medial to lateral vs. lateral to medial approaches in laparoscopic colorectal cancer resections.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Anatomical dissection approaches in right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision: characteristics of surgical outcomes from a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Revisiting the lateral-to-medial approach in robotic surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Medial vs. inferior approach in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a comparative study of the perioperative outcomes for early-career surgeons.Surgery today · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Bowel cancer is a significant global health concern, ranking as the third most prevalent cancer worldwide. Laparoscopic resections have become a standard treatment modality for resectable colorectal cancer. This study aimed to compare the clinical and oncological outcomes of medial to lateral (ML) vs lateral to medial (LM) approaches in laparoscopic colorectal cancer resections. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a UK district general hospital from 2015 to 2019, including 402 patients meeting specific criteria. Demographic, clinical, operative, postoperative, and oncological data were collected. Participants were categorised into LM and ML groups. The primary outcome was 30-day complications, and secondary outcomes included operative duration, length of stay, lymph node harvest, and 3-year survival. Results: A total of 402 patients (55.7% males) were included: 102 (51.6% females) in the lateral mobilisation (LM) group and 280 (58.9% males) in the medial mobilisation (ML) group. Right hemicolectomy ( Discussion: The study contributes to the limited evidence on ML vs LM approaches. A shorter operative time in the LM group was noted in this study, contrary to some literature. Postoperative outcomes were comparable, with a non-significant increase in postoperative ileus in the LM group. The study emphasises the safety and feasibility of both approaches.
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.