SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2026
Anatomical dissection approaches in right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision: characteristics of surgical outcomes from a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of 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
backgroundSeveral anatomical dissection approaches have been proposed for right hemicolectomy (RHC) with complete mesocolic excision (CME). Even though all are considered safe, the evidence-based guiding selection remains limited. We aimed to systematically review the literature and perform a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare their relative characteristics.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was completed through August 2025. Eligible studies included adult patients undergoing minimally invasive RHC with CME, with the predominant dissection direction defined as medial-to-lateral (MtL), lateral-to-medial (LtM), cranial-to-caudal (CtC), or caudal-to-cranial, also known as the bottom-to-up (BtU) approach. The primary outcome was the number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs). Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, and conversion to open surgery.
resultsFourteen studies including 2,947 patients were analyzed (MtL: 1,539; LtM: 401; CtC: 291; BtU: 716). No significant pairwise differences were observed in lymph node harvest, although ranking analysis indicated that BtU was the most favorable approach. Secondary outcomes did not show any significant differences, although BtU tended to reduce operative time as compared to MtL. LtM ranked worst and was associated with a significantly higher open conversion rate versus BtU (RR: 26.84, 95% CrI: 2.29-2014.36) and MtL (RR: 8.27, 95% CrI: 1.07-216.68).
conclusionNo significant differences in LN harvest were observed among the four approaches. The BtU approach showed a non-significant trend toward a shorter operative time, whereas LtM was associated with a significantly higher rate of conversion to open surgery. Overall, the available evidence does not demonstrate clear superiority of any single approach, and further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.