ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2025
Comparative efficacy analysis of laparoscopic-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2025. 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.
- Brief insight regarding the use of transanal, laparoscopic, and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the continuous development of laparoscopic techniques in recent years, laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LapTME) and laparoscopic-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) have gradually become important surgical techniques for treating low-lying rectal cancer (LRC). However, there is still controversy over the efficacy and safety of these two surgical modalities in LRC treatment.
aimTo compare the efficacy of LapTME
methodsNinety-four patients with LRC who visited and were treated at the Affiliated Hengyang Hospital of Hunan Normal University & Hengyang Central Hospital between December 2022 and March 2024 were selected and divided into the LapTME (
resultsCompared with the LapTME group, the surgery time in the TaTME group was longer; intraoperative blood loss was low; time of anal exhaust, first postoperative ambulation, intestinal recovery, and hospital stay were shorter; and the distal incisal margin and specimen lengths were longer. The TaTME group also showed higher ARP, MSP, and MTV values and higher MSKCC and QLQ-C30 scores than the LapTME group 3 months postoperatively. Cor, AD, and NE levels were lower in the TaTME group than those in the LapTME group during recovery.
conclusionWe demonstrated that TaTME better improved anal function, reduced postoperative stress, and accelerated postoperative recovery and, hence, was safer for patients with LRC.
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.