ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025
Surgical outcomes and patient selection in nonagenarians with colon cancer: a comparative multi-institutional study of laparoscopic and open approaches.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe appropriate surgical approach for colon cancer (CC) in nonagenarian patients remains a subject of clinical debate. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic (Lap) versus open (Open) surgery in patients aged ≥ 90 years with resectable colon cancer.
methodsThis multi-institutional retrospective cohort study included oldest-old patientswith pathological Stage II/III CC who underwent elective surgery at 15 hospitals between 2011 and 2022. Patients with rectal cancer, Stage 0/I/IV disease, or emergency surgery were excluded. To address selection bias, inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment and stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW) were applied. The primary outcome was postoperative complications; secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS).
resultsMedian age was 92 years in both groups. Before adjustment, the Lap group had a higher proportion of female patients (p = 0.038) and lower ASA scores (p = 0.01). Laparoscopic surgery was associated with a significantly longer operative time (220 vs. 171 min, p = 0.046) but less intraoperative blood loss (10 vs. 78 mL, p < 0.01). Postoperative complication rates were comparable (Lap: 31.8%, Open: 33.8%), while the Lap group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (13 vs. 17 days, p < 0.01). D3 lymph node dissection was more frequently performed in the Lap group (p < 0.01). After sIPTW, overall survival did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.61).
conclusionBoth laparoscopic and open surgery are feasible options for selected nonagenarians with colon cancer. Laparoscopic surgery may offer benefits in terms of reduced blood loss and shorter hospitalization, despite longer operative times. Careful patient selection considering frailty and comorbidities is essential in determining the most appropriate surgical approach.
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.