Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39847175›Full record

ReviewTechniques in coloproctology2025

The oncologic benefits of lateral lymph node dissection after neoadjuvant therapy - local control or survival?

T Sammour

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Techniques in coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

T SammourColorectal Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Port Road, SA, 5000, Australia. tarik.sammour@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4918-8871

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) for rectal adenocarcinoma is an established treatment modality for selected patients with abnormal lateral pelvic lymph nodes on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging. The goal of this treatment is to achieve a true R0 resection, including lymphadenectomy, with the aim of improving patient oncological outcome, potentially at the expense of surgical and functional complications. However, there remain several areas of controversy resulting from a distinct lack of clarity regarding effective patient selection, lymph node size criteria, the role and extent of routine neoadjuvant treatment versus surgery alone in selected cases, the impact on patient survival metrics and whether the existing data are even valid in the era of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). Furthermore, the lack of widely disseminated surgical standardisation and expertise in performing this procedure potentially contributes to the lack of utilisation in certain countries and regions. In this narrative review, we summarize the current state of the literature and attempt to answer the question of what oncological benefits there are, if any, from LPLND after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer, and whether these justify the risks and potential need for inter-hospital transfer.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaLymph Node ExcisionNeoadjuvant TherapyRectal NeoplasmsHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMagnetic Resonance ImagingPatient SelectionPelvisTreatment OutcomeColorectalLateral nodesLymph nodesRectal cancer

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.