The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer
Open accessAbstract
Background: The laparoscopic treatment of rectal cancer is controversial. This study compared surgical outcomes after laparoscopic and open approaches for mid and low rectal cancers. Methods: Some 204 patients with mid and low rectal adenocarcinomas were allocated randomly to open (103) or laparoscopic (101) surgery. The surgical team was the same for both procedures. Most patients had stage II or III disease, and received neoadjuvant therapy with oral capecitabine and 50–54 Gy external beam radiotherapy. Results: Sphincter-preserving surgery was performed in 78·6 and 76·2 per cent of patients in the open and laparoscopic groups respectively. Blood loss was significantly greater for open surgery (P < 0·001) and operating time was significantly greater for laparoscopic surgery (P = 0·020), and return to diet and hospital stay were longer for open surgery. Complication rates, and involvement of circumferential and radial margins were similar for both procedures, but the number of isolated lymph nodes was greater in the laparoscopic group (mean 13·63 versus 11·57; P = 0·026). There were no differences in local recurrence, disease-free or overall survival. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has a similar complication rate to open surgery, with less blood loss, rapid intestinal recovery, shorter hospital stay, and no compromise of oncological outcomes. Registration number: NCT00782457 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40618-3 · Cited by 17,242
American Joint Committee on Cancer (2002) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3656-4 · Cited by 6,379
Preoperative Radiotherapy Combined with Total Mesorectal Excision for Resectable Rectal Cancer
Kapiteijn, E., Marijnen, C. A. M., Nagtegaal, I. D., Putter, H., Steup, W. H., Wiggers, T., Rutten, H. J. T., Pahlman, L., Glimelius, B., van Krieken, J. H. J. M., et al. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa010580 · Cited by 4,205
Guillou, P. J., Quirke, P., Thorpe, H., Walker, J., Jayne, D. G., Smith, A. M., Heath, R. M., & Brown, J. M. (2005) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66545-2 · Cited by 3,064
Jayne, D. G., Guillou, P. J., Thorpe, H., Quirke, P., Copeland, J., Smith, A. M. H., Heath, R. M., & Brown, J. M. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.09.7758 · Cited by 1,497
Fleshman, J., Sargent, D. J., Green, E., Anvari, M., Stryker, S. J., Beart, R. W., Hellinger, M., Flanagan, R., Peters, W., & Nelson, H. (2007) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318155a762 · Cited by 1,124
The Stockholm I trial of preoperative short term radiotherapy in operable rectal carcinoma
Cedermark, B., Johansson, H., Rutqvist, L. E., & The Stockholm Colorectal Cancer Study Group (1995) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19950501)75:9<2269::aid-cncr2820750913>3.0.co;2-i · Cited by 639
Laparoscopically Assisted vs Open Colectomy for Colon Cancer: A Meta-analysis
(2007) · Archives of Surgery · doi:10.1001/archsurg.142.3.298 · Cited by 536
Perioperative blood transfusions for the recurrence of colorectal cancer
Amato, A., & Pescatori, M. (2004) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005033 · Cited by 406
Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
Aziz, O., Constantinides, V., Tekkis, P. P., Athanasiou, T., Purkayastha, S., Paraskeva, P., Darzi, A. W., & Heriot, A. G. (2006) · Annals of Surgical Oncology · doi:10.1245/aso.2006.05.045 · Cited by 392
Cited by
Kang, S.-B., Park, J. W., Jeong, S.-Y., Nam, B. H., Choi, H. S., Kim, D.-W., Lim, S.-B., Lee, T.-G., Kim, D. Y., Kim, J.-S., et al. (2010) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(10)70131-5 · Cited by 1,019
Jeong, S.-Y., Park, J. W., Nam, B. H., Kim, S., Kang, S.-B., Lim, S.-B., Choi, H. S., Kim, D.-W., Chang, H. J., Kim, D. Y., et al. (2014) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70205-0 · Cited by 888
Park, J. S., Choi, G.-S., Kim, S. H., Kim, H. R., Kim, N. K., Lee, K. Y., Kang, S. B., Kim, J. Y., Lee, K. Y., Kim, B. C., et al. (2013) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31827b8ed9 · Cited by 450
de Lacy, A. M., Rattner, D. W., Adelsdorfer, C., Tasende, M. M., Fernández, M., Delgado, S., Sylla, P., & Martínez-Palli, G. (2013) · Surgical Endoscopy · doi:10.1007/s00464-013-2872-0 · Cited by 301
Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer
Breukink, S., Pierie, J.-P., & Wiggers, T. (2006) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005200.pub2 · Cited by 287
Metadata
- Authors
- Lujan, J., Valero, G., Hernandez, Q., Sanchez, A., Frutos, M. D., & Parrilla, P.
- Venue
- British Journal of Surgery
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-07-30
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 982-989
- ISSN
- 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2168
- OpenAlex
- W2076791089
- Cited by
- 388
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 14.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bjs.6662
- The paper
- Lujan, J., Valero, G., Hernandez, Q., Sanchez, A., Frutos, M. D., & Parrilla, P. (2009). Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer. British Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.6662
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
