Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40955840›Full record

ArticleJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2025

Sarcopenia in Colorectal Cancer Surgery-Minimally Invasive vs. Open.

Felix Merboth, Miriam Müller-Oerlinghausen, Heiner Nebelung, Andreas Bogner, Mathieu Pecqueux, Nadja Salisch, Marius Distler, Verena Plodeck, Ralf-Thorsten Hoffmann, Johannes Fritzmann and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Sarcopenia in Colorectal Cancer Surgery-Minimally Invasive vs. Open.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025
    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

12 authors.

Felix MerbothDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2540-6421
Miriam Müller-OerlinghausenDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Heiner NebelungInstitute and Polyclinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Andreas BognerGeneral, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Mathieu PecqueuxDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Nadja SalischDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Marius DistlerDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Verena PlodeckInstitute and Polyclinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Ralf-Thorsten HoffmannInstitute and Polyclinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Johannes FritzmannDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Jürgen WeitzDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Johanna KirchbergDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSarcopenia, characterized by loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength, is prevalent in patients undergoing treatment for colorectal cancer. Sarcopenia's prevalence in patients with cancer can reach up to 50% and is known to exacerbate postsurgical complications and affect long-term oncological outcomes. This study examined whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) offers protective benefits against postoperative sarcopenia compared with open surgery in patients undergoing rectal cancer resection.

methodsThis retrospective analysis included 145 patients who underwent open or minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) rectal resections at the University Hospital Dresden between 2013 and 2021. Confounding variables were adjusted using propensity score matching. The skeletal muscle index (SMI) and psoas muscle thickness per height (PMTH) were analysed in preoperative and postoperative computed tomography scans to measure changes in skeletal muscle mass. Potential risk factors for muscle loss were evaluated, and oncological long-term outcome was analysed.

resultsThe results indicate that oncological rectal resection did not result in pronounced postoperative muscle loss. No significant difference between the open and MIS groups in terms of postoperative muscle loss over 3 years postoperatively could be detected. Wound healing disorders were identified as the most significant independent risk factors for muscle loss (SMI loss > 10%). In contrast, neither the type of surgical technique nor the presence of a protective loop ileostomy significantly influenced the development of postoperative muscle loss. Patients who experienced a > 10% SMI loss within the first year had significantly poorer overall and disease-free survival. The 1-year survival rate was 93.3% in the group with high SMI loss compared with 100.0% in the group with low SMI loss (p = 0.435). The 3-year (66.7% vs. 95.6%, HR 8.75, 95% CI 1.855-41.286, p = 0.006) and 5-year (44.4% vs. 93.3%, HR 11.072, 95% CI 2.414-50.782, p = 0.002) survival rates were significantly lower in patients with high SMI loss. Patients with high SMI loss had an increased likelihood of recurrence and metastasis.

conclusionsAlthough MIS did not confer a protective advantage against postoperative muscle loss in patients with rectal cancer, the findings highlight the critical role of maintaining muscle mass in improving survival outcomes. Postoperative muscle loss appears to be a marker of aggressive tumour behaviour, and interventions aimed at minimizing muscle loss, such as enhanced nutritional support, may improve the long-term patient prognosis. Future studies should explore interventional strategies to mitigate sarcopenia in this population.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresSarcopeniaAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk Factorsminimally invasive surgeryoncological outcomeopen surgeryrectal cancersarcopeniaskeletal muscle index

Identifiers

PMID40955840
PMCPMC12439183

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.