ReviewCureus2026
Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Lateral Lymph Node Dissection Following Total Mesorectal Excision for Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to compare laparoscopic vs open lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) for locally advanced rectal cancer to assess operative outcomes and postoperative complications. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials for studies published up to June 2025. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics, and statistical analyses were performed in R Software version 4.4.1 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). Eight retrospective trials involved 896 patients undergoing total mesorectal excision plus LPLND for treatment of rectal cancer, of whom 470 (52.4%) underwent the laparoscopic and 426 (47.6%) open surgery. The laparoscopic group showed lower intraoperative blood loss (MD = -732.8 ml; 95% CI: -1328.1 to -83.5; p = 0.03; I² = 95%) and lower need for blood transfusion (OR = 0.28; 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.49; p < 0.0001; I² = 6%). Trends favoring the laparoscopic group were observed for overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.01; p = 0.057; I² = 50%), and wound infection (OR = 0.54; 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.03; p = 0.063; I² = 0%). No statistically significant differences were observed between groups for abdominal abscess, intestinal obstruction, Clavien-Dindo complications grade ≥ 3, lower limb neuropathy, anastomotic and lymphatic leakage, total lymph nodes harvested, LPLN harvested, operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and time to a soft diet. In conclusion, laparoscopic LPLND has been associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss and seems to confer improved safety and effectiveness in the treatment of rectal 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.