ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2026
Impact of the timing of additional surgery after noncurative endoscopic resection of early colorectal cancer on perioperative and oncological outcomes: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFor early colorectal cancer (CRC) following noncurative endoscopic resection, additional curative surgery is the standard of care, but the optimal timing remains unclear. This study investigated the effect of the interval between procedures on surgical complexity, complications, and oncological outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective study included 112 patients with early CRC who underwent additional laparoscopic surgery after noncurative endoscopic resection between August 2019 and August 2024. Clinical and pathological data were collected, with primary endpoints focused on surgical difficulty (operative duration and intraoperative blood loss). Statistical analyses were performed using multivariate analysis of variance, logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.
resultsThe interval between procedures was not significantly associated with surgical difficulty or lymph node metastasis (P>0.05). Multivariate analysis did not identify an optimal timing point for surgery. However, a longer waiting time was independently associated with an increased risk of residual tumor (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.16; P=0.004). Furthermore, lymphovascular invasion and elevated preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen levels were identified as independent predictors of lymph node metastasis. A higher preoperative lymphocyte ratio was associated with an increased risk of postoperative intra-abdominal infection (r=0.243, P=0.010).
conclusionIn the era of laparoscopic surgery, the timing of additional surgery does not appear to be the primary determinant of surgical difficulty in CRC. Clinical decision-making should prioritize high-risk pathological features, such as lymphovascular invasion, rather than rigid adherence to a predetermined waiting period. Strategically delaying surgery may facilitate the selection of patients without residual disease, thereby helping to avoid unnecessary procedures.
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.