ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2025
A simple and effective evaluation method to determine the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for male patients with mid and lower rectal cancer.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender-Specific Cancer-Related Survival Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Observational
- SAGES colorectal and metabolic bariatric surgery committee joint task force call to action for synchronized severe obesity and colorectal cancer management.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: The Contraindications of the Past are the Indications of the Future.Current obesity reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRadical resection for mid and low rectal cancer is probably the most challenging type of surgery in colorectal surgery, especially in a narrow male pelvis. In this study, we aimed to define a simple and effective evaluation method based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and body mass index (BMI) to predict the operation difficulty of radical resection for mid and low rectal cancer in male patients.
methodsA total of 264 male patients who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) due to primary rectal cancer located in the mid and low rectum (distal tumor margin distance from the anal verge ≤ 7 cm) were retrospectively included in the study. An angle SAU° [formed by two lines: line 1 (connecting the anteroinferior border of the fifth sacral vertebra and center point of anus) and line 2 (connecting internal urethral orifice and center point of anus)] was measured using the built-in software of MRI for every patient. The patients were categorized into four groups according to the angle SAU° and BMI. The operative time, estimated blood loss, TME quality, and anastomotic leakage (AL) were compared between group 1 and group 2 as well as between group 3 and group 4.
resultsGroup 1 included 111 patients with angle SAU° > 60 and BMI < 25 kg/m
conclusionAngle SAU° based on MRI combined with BMI is a simple and effective evaluation method to predict the difficulty in TME for male patients with mid and low rectal cancer. It may also have value in predicting AL.
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.