ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Outcomes of Open Versus Laparoscopic Colon Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Postoperative Complications, Recovery Times, and Long-Term Survival.
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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Open and laparoscopic colon surgeries are both common interventions for benign and malignant colonic diseases. Evidence regarding their comparative effectiveness on postoperative and long-term outcomes remains mixed. This study aimed to evaluate differences in complications, recovery times, and survival between the two approaches using propensity score matching to reduce selection bias. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 600 patients undergoing colon surgery: 218 (36.3%) open, 168 (28.0%) laparoscopic, and 214 (35.7%) robotic-assisted procedures. Mean age was 56 years (range: 18-88), with an equal sex distribution. Indications included benign disease (51.7%) and malignancy (48.3%), predominantly Stage III colorectal cancer (56.5%). Outcomes included postoperative complications, pain scores, length of stay (LOS), and mortality. Results Postoperative complications occurred in 80% of patients, most frequently deep vein thrombosis (21.5%), anastomotic leak (19.8%), and infection (19.3%), with no significant difference between surgical groups (p = 0.493). Laparoscopic surgery resulted in significantly lower pain scores (mean: 4.5 versus 5.7; p = 0.009, Cohen's d = 0.23) and shorter LOS (mean: 4.2 versus 6.3 days; p = 0.011, Cohen's d = 0.38) compared to open surgery. Thirty-day mortality rates were similar across groups (p = 0.633). Cardiovascular disease (HR = 2.01, p = 0.004), diabetes (HR = 1.85, p = 0.008), and lower socioeconomic status were significant predictors of long-term mortality and prolonged recovery. Conclusion Laparoscopic colon surgery offers significant short-term advantages in pain reduction and hospitalization length but does not reduce complication rates or improve long-term survival compared to open surgery. Comorbidities and socioeconomic disparities have greater influence on long-term outcomes than surgical technique.
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.