ArticleAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2025
Efficacy of lymph node dissection around the inferior mesenteric artery with preservation of the left colic artery for rectal cancer.
Article in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2025. 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.
- Efficacy of lymph node dissection around the inferior mesenteric artery with preservation of the left colic artery for rectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We investigated how Japanese D3 dissection with left colic artery (LCA) preservation affects anastomotic leakage after anterior resection with anastomosis for rectal cancer, based on the leak rate. The correlation between LCA preservation, survival, and cancer recurrence after resection was also analyzed. Summary and Background Data: It remains unclear how LCA preservation affects the anastomotic leak rate and oncological outcomes after resection remains unclear. Some reports suggested that anastomotic leakage increases local recurrence and decreases cancer-specific survival. Methods: In this study, we enrolled and analyzed 457 patients who underwent radical resection of rectal cancer in the period October 2011 through December 2016. The attending surgeon decided preoperatively and registered whether to preserve the LCA. This trial was registered under the UMIN-CTR Identifier UMIN000006160. Results: D3 with LCA preservation was successfully completed in 218 (89.3%) of the 244 patients registered in this group, whereas D3 without LCA preservation was successfully completed in all 213 patients registered in this group. After propensity score matching, the anastomotic leakage rate was 7.86% (11/140) after D3 with LCA preservation and 7.14% (10/140) after D3 without LCA preservation. The overall survival rates were 90.1% and 89.3%, and the recurrence-free survival rates were 77.6% and 77.3%, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that LCA preservation has no effect on the incidence of anastomotic leakage after rectal resection with anastomosis using DST and that oncological outcomes may not be affected.
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.