ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Laparoscopic surgery is associated with increased risk of postoperative peritoneal metastases in T4 colon cancer: a propensity score analysis.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to evaluate the postoperative safety, long-term survival, and postoperative peritoneal metastases (PPM) rate associated with laparoscopic surgery (LS) for T4 colon cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsAfter propensity score matching, there were 68 patients in each of the LS and Open surgery groups. The primary outcomes were the 3-year OS, DFS, and PPM rates.
resultsAfter matching, 68 patients in each of the groups. The LS group had a higher cumulative 3-year peritoneal metastasis rate (19.8% vs. 6.7%, P = .036), while the 3-year OS (82.3% vs. 83.8%, P = .750) and 2-year DFS (69.0% vs. 75.7%, P = .310) showed no significant difference, compared to the open surgery group. The LS group had a significantly longer operation time (201 ± 85.7 min vs. 164 ± 65.9 min, P = .008) but less postoperative complications (P = .036). Additionally, patients in the LS group removed gastric tube more quickly (1.91 ± 1.18 days vs. 2.69 ± 2.41 days, P = .048). The multivariate analysis revealed that LS (HR = 3.496, 95% CI = 1.108-11.030, P = .033), underweight (HR = 11.650, 95% CI = 2.155-62.990, P = .004), and lymphovascular invasion (HR = 3.123, 95% CI = 1.010-9.664, P = .048) were all predictive factors of PPM. For the pN + subgroup, the 3-year cumulative PPM rate was 29.6% in the LS group, significantly higher than 15.3% in the open group (P = .029), but there was no significant difference after PSM (P = .100).
conclusionLS offers faster postoperative recovery and comparable long-term survival outcomes. Therefore, it should remain a viable option for locally advanced T4 colon cancer. However, it is crucial to fully recognize the potential risk of increased PPM associated with LS, especially in patients with preoperative suspicion of positive lymph nodes. Further multicenter prospective studies are necessary to validate the potential risks of LS and gain insight into treatment efficacy in different patient populations. In addition, future studies should assess prognosis based on the grade and extent of peritoneal dissemination to provide a more nuanced understanding.
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.