ArticleIndian journal of surgical oncology2025
Is It Worth Performing Intersphincteric Resection in Patients Having Rectal Adenocarcinoma with Oligometastasis.
Article in Indian journal of surgical oncology, 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.
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
Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is being increasingly performed in metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma (with oligometastasis) patients. There has been a trend towards worse prognosis in this group. This study compares the oncological and surgical outcomes of patients with and without pre-operative oligometastasis who underwent ISR. The outcomes compared include prognostic factors like margin positivity, recurrence rates, stoma reversal rate, and surgical failure rate (defined as a combination of one or more of the aforestated factors). The demographic pattern, American Society of Anaesthesia grade (ASA), treatment received, clinical and histopathological T and N stage, grade, type of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approach, neoadjuvant therapy, and pathological high-risk features are also studied. Patients who underwent minimally invasive ISR over 10 years at a high-volume tertiary cancer center were selected for the study. Factors used for the assessment of oncological outcomes were margin positivity (circumferential resection and distal margin), recurrence (both local and systemic), and stoma reversal rate. A descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Four hundred and eight patients underwent minimally invasive ISR of which 25 (6.12%) patients were oligometastatic. While R0 resection was similar in both groups, higher overall recurrence (24% versus 18.5%) and low stoma reversal rate (36.8% versus 67.3%) were observed in the oligometastatic group with statistically significant differences. No local recurrence was seen in the oligometastatic group, and the difference compared to non-metastatic group was not statistically different. This study indicates that oligometastatic patients who underwent ISR experienced lower stoma reversal rates, maintaining similar local control but facing higher rates of systemic recurrence. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-024-02117-3.
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.