Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 443

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is local excision adequate therapy for early rectal cancer?

Mellgren, Anders, Sirivongs, Prayuth, Rothenberger, David A., Madoff, Robert D., García-Aguilar, Julio·2000·Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
DOI 10.1007/bf02236551
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: Radical surgery of rectal cancer is associated with significant morbidity, and some patients with low-lying lesions must accept a permanent colostomy. Several studies have suggested satisfactory tumor control after local excision of early rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare recurrence and survival rates after treating early rectal cancers with local excision and radical surgery. METHODS: One hundred eight patients with T1 and T2 rectal adenocarcinomas treated by transanal excision were compared with 153 patients with T1N0 and T2N0 rectal adenocarcinomas treated with radical surgery. Neither group received adjuvant chemoradiation. Mean follow-up time was 4.4 years after local excision and 4.8 years after radical surgery. RESULTS: The estimated five-year local recurrence rate was 28 percent (18 percent for T1 tumors and 47 percent for T2 tumors) after local excision and 4 percent (none for T1 tumors and 6 percent for T2 tumors) after radical surgery. Overall recurrence was also higher after local excision (21 percent for T1 tumors and 47 percent for T2 tumors) than after radical surgery (9 percent for T1 tumors and 16 percent for T2 tumors). Twenty-four of 27 patients with recurrence after local excision underwent salvage surgery. The estimated five-year overall survival rate was 69 percent after local excision (72 percent for T1 tumors and 65 percent after T2 tumors) and 82 percent after radical surgery (80 percent for T1 tumors and 81 percent for T2 tumors). Differences in survival rate between local excision and radical surgery were statistically significant in patients with T2 tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Local excision of early rectal cancer carries a high risk of local recurrence. Salvage surgery is possible in most patients with local recurrence, but may be effective only in patients with T1 tumors. When compared with radical surgery, local excision may compromise overall survival in patients with T2 rectal cancers.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02236551

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 443

Metadata

Authors
Mellgren, A., Sirivongs, P., Rothenberger, D. A., Madoff, R. D., & García-Aguilar, J.
Venue
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2000-08
Volume
43
Issue
8
Pages
1064-1071
ISSN
0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/bf02236551
OpenAlex
W2027112842
Cited by
443
References
19
FWCI
5.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.