ArticleAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2026
Independent Prognostic Significance of Perforation in Colorectal Cancer: Insights From a Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.
Article in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Although perforated colorectal cancer has a poor prognosis, it remains unclear whether this is attributed to the perforation itself or related clinicopathological factors indicating advanced tumor progression. We investigated the true prognostic impact of perforation in colorectal cancer after adjusting for perforation-related clinicopathological factors. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included 2073 patients underwent curative resection for primary colorectal cancer between January 2009 and December 2022 (73 with perforated colorectal cancer and 2000 with nonperforated colorectal cancer). Perforation-related clinicopathological factors were identified by multivariate logistic regression and used for 1:2 propensity score matching as covariates. Recurrence-free survival and overall survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Independent perforation-related clinicopathological factors were age ≥ 75 years, left-sided tumor, and pathological T Stage 4 (pT4). The perforated colorectal cancer group had a lower rate of minimally invasive surgery (62.5% vs. 90.6%), fewer harvested lymph nodes (medians: 13 vs. 16.5), and more frequent major postoperative complications (18.8% vs. 7.3%) compared to the nonperforated colorectal cancer group. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed that pT4 and perforation independently predicted worse recurrence-free survival and overall survival. The hazard ratios were 2.71 and 2.54 for pT4 (95% confidence intervals: 1.45-5.04 and 1.08-5.9), and 2.67 and 3.30 for perforation (95% confidence intervals: 1.44-4.96 and 1.37-7.96), respectively. Conclusion: Perforation independently predicted poor prognosis in colorectal cancer, highlighting its distinct oncologic relevance beyond standard pathological staging. Prospective studies should establish individualized strategies to improve outcomes in perforated colorectal 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.