ArticleFrontiers in surgery2024
Retrospective analysis of immediate and long-term results of NOSES technique and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in patients with colorectal cancer.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of research was to study the feasibility and safety of surgery providing specimen extraction through natural orifices in patients with colorectal cancer. Materials and methods: This study is a comparative retrospective analysis of findings obtained from 265 patients who underwent surgical treatment using NOSES technique and 275 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted (LA) resection. Data included preoperative patients' information, intraoperative findings, results of postoperative pathological examination of surgical specimens, early postoperative period analysis, and follow-up. Results: Both groups were comparable in terms of gender, age and BMI. The duration of surgery was similar in both groups ( Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrate that NOSES technique is a relatively safe and effective surgical option in patients with colorectal cancer. It has high surgical efficiency providing no increased risk of surgical intervention, reducing total number of postoperative complications, reducing duration of postoperative hospital stay, reducing the time for gastrointestinal function recovery and the start of food intake. This study supports that NOSES has clear advantages over conventional laparoscopic-assisted surgery.
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.