Laparoscopic-assisted vs open surgery for synchronous colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study of short-term and long-term outcomes.

Jinglin Liang, Wei Chen, Junyi Yang, Meijin Huang, Hui Wang

Abstract readComparative Study

In one paragraph

Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jinglin Liang *Department of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery Unit), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, Biomedical Innovation Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510655, P. R. China.

Wei Chen *Department of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery Unit), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, Biomedical Innovation Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510655, P. R. China.

Junyi Yang *Department of Anorectal Surgery, Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Sichuan Academy of Chinese Medicine, The Sichuan Second Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Chengdu, 610031, P. R. China.

Meijin HuangDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery Unit), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, Biomedical Innovation Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510655, P. R. China. hmjin@mail.sysu.edu.cn.

Hui WangDepartment of General Surgery (Colorectal Surgery Unit), The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Diseases, Biomedical Innovation Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510655, P. R. China. wang89@mail.sysu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe oncologic safety of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for synchronous colorectal cancer (SCRC), a distinct high-risk subgroup, remains under-investigated. This study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for SCRC.

methodsA retrospective analysis of a cohort of 178 consecutive patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for SCRC between June 2007 and April 2019 was performed. To balance baseline covariates for the primary analysis, overlap weighting (OW) was applied to the cohort (133 laparoscopic, 45 open). A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted as a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcomes were 5-year overall survival (OS) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS).

resultsIn the primary OW analysis, the laparoscopic group showed significantly less estimated blood loss (median, 100 mL vs. 200 mL; P = 0.003) and shorter time to first liquid diet (median, 4 vs. 5 days; P = 0.005) than the open surgery group. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of 5-year OS (75.1% vs. 62.8%; P = 0.088) or 5-year DFS (65.69% vs. 59.3%; P = 0.110). Furthermore, in the multivariable Cox analysis, the laparoscopic approach was not an independent predictor of OS (adjusted HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.35-1.06) or DFS (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.41-1.18). These findings were consistent in the PSM sensitivity analysis.

conclusionsIn this study, laparoscopic-assisted surgery for SCRC offered improved short-term outcomes while maintaining long-term oncologic safety.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLaparoscopyNeoplasms, Multiple PrimaryAgedBlood Loss, SurgicalColorectal Surgical ProceduresDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeDisease-free survivalLaparoscopic surgeryOncologic outcomesOverall survivalOverlap weightingPropensity score matchingSynchronous colorectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID41851844

DOI10.1186/s12876-025-04430-9

PMCPMC12998114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.