ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Preoperative
Article in Frontiers in 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: In acute left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer (OCC), the proximal colon cannot be evaluated endoscopically before surgery, and synchronous colorectal cancers (sCRC) and clinically significant neoplasms (CSN) may remain undetected. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of preoperative Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 149 consecutive patients with acute left-sided obstructive colorectal adenocarcinoma (splenic flexure through rectum) treated by primary curative resection at two tertiary centers (2007-2016). Postoperative clearing colonoscopy within 6 months served as the reference standard. PET positivity was defined as focal FDG uptake with SUVmax ≥4.0 in a colorectal segment distinct from the index tumor. The primary endpoint was invasive sCRC; the secondary endpoint was CSN. Results: Median age was 69 years; 71.1% were male. Invasive sCRC was confirmed in 9 patients (6.0%) and CSN in 17 (11.4%). For invasive sCRC, PET/CT showed sensitivity 77.8%, specificity 95.0%, PPV 50.0%, and NPV 98.5%. For CSN, sensitivity was 52.9%, specificity 96.2%, PPV 64.3%, and NPV 94.1%. Among 135 PET-negative patients, 2 (1.5%) harbored invasive sCRC. Secondary curative resection was required in 5 patients (3.4%) and therapeutic endoscopy in 8 (5.4%). Conclusions: Preoperative
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.