ReviewCureus2024
The Role of Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Middle and Lower Rectal Cancer (Stage II or III): A Literature Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer in the Lateral Compartment: Imaging Features and Association with Primary Tumour Characteristics.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- ICG fluorescence-guided sentinel lymph node biopsy for decision-making in lateral lymph node dissection in local advanced rectal cancer: a retrospective study.Updates in surgery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lateral lymph node dissection and its inclusion in the treatment of rectal cancer is a controversial issue, with great differences, especially between Eastern and Western countries. Studies try to highlight the superiority of resection of these lymph nodes compared to simple mesorectal resection in terms of local recurrence of the disease, the overall survival of patients, and additional postoperative complications. In this study, the modern literature was reviewed, with the ultimate goal of clarifying the exact importance of lateral lymph node dissection, in terms of oncological outcome in patients with cancer of the middle and lower rectum, by studying the involvement of this lymph node dispersion in terms of local recurrence and overall survival of patients with rectal cancer. This review was carried out using electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE, with studies dating back to the last decade. Of the 31 studies that were eventually included in the final review, there is no statistically clear superiority and real benefit from lymph node resection beyond the lymph nodes of the mid-rectum. European guidelines are set against lateral lymph node dissection, except for lymph nodes that show suspicious features on preoperative imaging. In contrast, in Eastern countries, total mesorectal excision (TME) with extensive simultaneous resection of the lateral pelvic lymph nodes (LPLNs) is the protocol followed. Recent studies focus on the subcategory of patients with non-responsive to adjuvant therapy, lateral lymph nodes, in which the ultimate benefit of extensive lymph node dissection is explored. The decision to join the TME procedure for the removal of the LPLNs is a subject of intense research. There are no data on the criteria for determining these lymph nodes as an increased risk of metastatic outbreaks. Despite the great clinical and research interest worldwide nowadays, the resection of LPLNs remains a controversial issue of debate, with intense disagreements according to geographical area, while the existence of additional studies is necessary to come to final conclusions.
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.