ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026
Clinical progress and technological innovations in sphincter-preserving treatment for ultra-low rectal cancer.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Impacts of neoadjuvant therapy on subsequent surgical difficulty, safety, and outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer: a narrative review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultra-low rectal cancer (defined as a tumor located within 5 cm from the anal verge) poses unique challenges owing to its distinctive anatomical location, necessitating an optimal balance between oncologic safety and functional preservation. This review focuses on the clinical progress and technological innovations in sphincter-preserving management for ultra-low rectal cancer and is organized within a hierarchical framework encompassing oncologic/anatomical principles, surgical procedures, operative approaches/platforms, specimen-extraction strategies, and multimodal therapy. We first outline plane-based resection principles centered on total mesorectal excision (TME) and key aspects of margin quality control. We then systematically summarize the spectrum of sphincter-preserving procedures, including low/ultra-low anterior resection (LAR/uLAR) and reconstructive options such as coloanal anastomosis (CAA), the transabdominal-transanal approach (TATA), pull-through procedures (Bacon and its modifications), and intersphincteric resection (ISR), with comparisons of indications, oncologic safety, and functional outcomes. Furthermore, we discuss the impact of laparoscopic, robotic, and transanal approaches (e.g., TaTME) on deep pelvic exposure, anatomical precision, and the learning curve, as well as the trade-offs between minimally invasive benefits and safety control associated with specimen-extraction strategies such as NOSE. Finally, we summarize the role of neoadjuvant and total neoadjuvant therapy in facilitating sphincter or organ preservation. Overall, sphincter-preserving treatment for ultra-low rectal cancer should be guided by standardized oncologic principles and tailored combinations of procedures and approaches, with the overarching goal of balancing functional benefit against oncologic safety.
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.