ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Evaluation of Complete Mesocolic Excision Versus Conventional Right Hemicolectomy in Right-Sided Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) has emerged as an advanced surgical technique aiming to improve oncological outcomes in right-sided colon cancer. This study aims to compare the surgical and short-term oncological outcomes between CME and conventional right hemicolectomy (CON) performed in a tertiary care center. Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted between January 2021 and December 2024 in Sree Balaji Medical College & Hospital, a high-volume tertiary care center in Chennai, India, including 180 patients with right-sided colon cancer. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the surgical technique: CME (n = 94) and CON (n = 86). Parameters assessed included lymph node harvest, operative time, postoperative complications, type of anastomosis (intracorporeal vs. extracorporeal), and stapling technique (Barcelona vs. standard). Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics, with a significance threshold set at p < 0.05. Results The CME group exhibited a significantly higher lymph node yield (≥12 nodes in 94.7% vs. 79.1%, p < 0.001) and increased adoption of intracorporeal anastomosis (44.7% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.001) and Barcelona stapling technique (35.1% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.001). Operative time was longer for CME (156 ± 47 minutes vs. 112 ± 35 minutes), although postoperative morbidity rates were comparable between groups. Conclusion CME with CVL offers superior lymph node harvest and facilitates minimally invasive anastomotic techniques without increasing postoperative complications. It should be considered the standard of care in experienced centers.
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.