ReviewChirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Surgery for colorectal cancer in the era of individualized treatment : The new German S3 guideline on colorectal cancer].
Review in Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current German S3 guidelines on colorectal cancer reflect the increasing individualization of treatment and include several changes of direct relevance to surgical practice. Pretherapeutic diagnostics increasingly serve as risk stratification and treatment planning. Computed tomography of the chest and abdomen is now part of the standard diagnostic work-up, while structured pelvic magnetic resonance imaging plays a central role in rectal cancer. Determination of the mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability (dMMR/MSI) status is recommended before initiation of treatment and can fundamentally alter the treatment strategy, particularly in rectal cancer. Minimally invasive surgical procedures are explicitly recommended and complete mesocolic excision is emphasized as a surgical principle in colon cancer. In rectal cancer, organ-preserving treatment strategies need to be considered as part of interdisciplinary treatment planning before proceeding to surgery. For patients requiring resection, partial and total mesorectal excision remain the surgical standards; however, several recommendations, including those concerning extralevator abdominoperineal excision, perineal reconstruction and full-thickness local excision of early rectal cancer, require careful interpretation in the context of the underlying evidence. Follow-up strategies have also become increasingly more individualized. In addition to detection of recurrence, structured watch and wait protocols following organ-preserving treatment and the systematic assessment and management of long-term functional sequelae after rectal cancer surgery are gaining importance. Overall, the new guidelines mark a shift from standardized treatment pathways towards risk-adapted, interdisciplinary and shared decision-making in colorectal cancer treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42771175What 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.