SynthesisBMC surgery2025
Minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision versus conventional right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThere is insufficient evidence to support the application of complete mesocolic excision (CME) in minimally invasive surgery for right-sided colonic cancer. This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive CME compared with conventional right hemicolectomy for right-sided colonic cancer.
methodsIn adherence to PRISMA guidelines, 13 studies were included in the analysis (comprising 3 randomized controlled trials and 10 cohort studies, involving a total of 3,743 patients). Key outcomes assessed included lymph node yield, operative metrics, complication profiles, and survival outcomes.
resultsMinimally invasive CME demonstrated significantly higher lymph node retrieval (mean difference [MD]: 6.09, 95% CI: 3.48-8.70, p < 0.001), a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage (0.87% vs. 1.86%, risk ratio [RR]: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24-0.94), improved 3-year overall survival (85.4% vs. 82.2%, RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.00-1.10), and 3-year disease-free survival (93.8% vs. 89.4%, RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07) compared with conventional right hemicolectomy. Although the operative time was longer for CME (MD: 67.84 min, p < 0.001), no significant differences were observed between groups regarding other complication rates or intraoperative blood loss. Subgroup analyses revealed comparable outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic approaches.
conclusionMinimally invasive CME offers superior oncological outcomes, particularly in terms of lymph node dissection and survival, without compromising short-term safety. Despite certain limitations, including insufficient long-term survival data and variability in adjuvant therapy reporting, CME represents a promising strategy for the treatment of right-sided colon cancer.
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.