ArticleCancers2026
Comparison of Pelvic Peritonectomy vs. Rectosigmoid Resection During Hudson Procedure for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: 6-Year Experience of an ESGO-Certified Center.
Article in Cancers, 2026. 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.
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
(1) Background: Hudson first described the procedure that includes en-block removal of an ovarian tumor fixed in the pelvis with the whole pelvic peritoneum and invaded surrounding structures. However, sometimes pelvic peritonectomy (PP) with or without shaving of the bowel serosa is not enough to achieve complete cytoreduction, and en-block rectosigmoid resection (RR) is necessary. This study aims to investigate the impact of bowel surgery on survival rates and morbidity of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with advanced ovarian cancer with cul-de-sac involvement that underwent debulking surgery at the 1st Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology of "Papageorgiou" General Hospital, from 2017-2022. The primary outcomes were the survival rates and morbidity between PP and RR. (3) Results: A total of 93 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group A (34 patients) with RR and Group B (59 patients) with PP. There was no statistically significant difference in the majority of patients' characteristics and oncological outcomes. On the other hand, patients with RR had a significantly higher surgical complexity score (SCS), peritoneal cancer index (PCI), ICU admission, rate of postoperative complications, longer surgery duration and hospital stay. When comparing the duration of surgery, the RR group has significantly higher operation time during primary compared to interval debulking surgery. Concerning survival rates, there was no significant difference in progression-free (PFS) (
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.