ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2024
Combined versus conventional approaches in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factor analysis of postsurgical gastroparesis syndrome after right hemicolectomy for colon cancer.Oncology letters · 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
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic-assisted radical surgery for right hemicolonic cancer with a combined approach.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of clinical data from 102 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer at the Department of General Surgery, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, between January 2021 and September 2023. All patients received preoperative diagnoses of right hemicolonic cancer via CT and e-colonoscopy. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the surgical approach: the combined approach group (n = 51) and the traditional approach group (n = 51). Perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.
resultsA total of 102 patients were included in the statistical criteria. Comparison of baseline data between the two groups showed no statistically significant differences (all p > 0.05). Compared with the traditional access group, the surgical stem-oriented combined access group had a shorter operative time [(180.69 ± 47.484) min vs. (226.18 ± 45.884) min, t = - 4.920, p < 0.001] and less intraoperative blood loss [(89.71 ± 79.350) ml vs. (149.31 ± 104.633) ml. Z = - 3.370, p = 0.001.
conclusionsSurgical stem-oriented modified combined approach laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy for right hemicolonic cancer is safe and feasible and has the advantages of low surgical difficulty, shortened operative time, reduced intraoperative bleeding, and accelerated postoperative recovery. In addition, the combined approach may be more agreeable for beginners to master, and the procedure may be easier to promote and popularize.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (2024-KY-026-01).
Indexed as
Identifiers
39586892What 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.