ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Rethinking surgical strategy for margin-positive only T1 colorectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEndoscopic resection is frequently performed for early T1 colorectal cancer (CRC), with additional surgery indicated when histopathological risk factors are present, such as a positive vertical margin, submucosal invasion depth greater than 1000 µm, lymphatic or vascular invasion, poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, signet-ring cell carcinoma, mucinous carcinoma, or grade 2/3 tumor budding at the deepest invasive site. In patients undergoing radical resection for T1 CRC, the incidence of lymph node metastases(LNM) has been reported to be approximately 10%. The purpose of this study is to identify factors influencing the decision for radical resection in patients with pathologically confirmed T1 CRC following endoscopic resection and to evaluate lymph node metastasis rates according to each risk factor, with a focus on determining whether radical resection might be safely avoided in carefully selected low-risk cases.
methodsThe study was designed as a retrospective multicenter comparative cohort study conducted at three tertiary referral centers in Korea. The study population consisted of patients with pathological T1 colorectal cancer who underwent radical resection following endoscopic resection between April 2019 and December 2024. The main outcome measure was the incidence of lymph node metastasis according to pathological risk factors, with a particular focus on patients with margin-positive lesions without any other risk factors. Univariate analyses were performed, and exact binomial confidence intervals were calculated for the margin-positive subgroups.
resultsAmong 250 patients who underwent radical surgery after endoscopic resection, 25 (10.0%) had lymph node metastasis. Lymphovascular invasion and KRAS mutation were significantly associated with lymph node metastasis. Twenty-two patients with margin positivity without any other risk factors had no LNM (0/22; 95% exact binomial confidence interval, 0-15.4%). Half (11/22) of these patients had no residual tumors on surgical specimens, whereas the remainder showed only submucosal residual tumors without nodal involvement.
conclusionAmong patients who underwent radical resection after endoscopic resection for T1 CRC, margin positivity without other recorded high-risk features was not associated with LNM in this cohort. However, given the small sample size and wide confidence interval, these findings should be considered hypothesis-generating and require further validation [1].
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.