Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40464924›Full record

ArticleSurgery today2025

Evaluating the short-term outcome of laparoscopic pelvic exenteration in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

Kosuke Ozaki, Toshiki Mukai, Yohei Ando, Tatsuki Noguchi, Takashi Sakamoto, Shimpei Matsui, Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Takashi Akiyoshi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery today, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

8 authors.

Kosuke OzakiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Toshiki MukaiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. toshiki.mukai@jfcr.or.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3553-3590
Yohei AndoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Tatsuki NoguchiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Takashi SakamotoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Shimpei MatsuiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Tomohiro YamaguchiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Takashi AkiyoshiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 31-8-3, Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePelvic exenteration (PE) is sometimes the only curative option for primary rectal cancer as well as locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). However, data on laparoscopic PE (Lap-PE) for LRRC are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the technical safety of Lap-PE in LRRC cases.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 63 patients who underwent Lap-PE between January 2013 and December 2023. Patients were categorized into primary (n = 41) and recurrent (n = 22) groups, and short-term outcomes, including operative details and postoperative complications, were compared.

resultsThe recurrent group had a significantly higher number of cases of multiple organs resected beyond PE (24.4% vs. 63.6%, p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in the operative time (714 vs. 633 min, p = 0.91) or blood loss (650 vs. 580 g, p = 0.98) between the groups. Clavien-Dindo Grade 3 complications occurred in 29.3% of primary cases and 18.2% of recurrent cases (p = 0.47). R0 resection was achieved in 95.1% of primary cases and 81.8% of recurrent cases (p = 0.10).

conclusionLap PE for LRRC, when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgical team with careful patient selection, was shown to be safe, with comparable short-term outcomes to those of PE for primary rectal cancer and an acceptable R0 resection rate.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPelvic ExenterationRectal NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlood Loss, SurgicalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSafetyColorectal cancerLaparoscopic pelvic exenterationPelvic recurrence

Identifiers

PMID40464924

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.