MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394618462 · doi:10.1111/codi.16982

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of oncological outcomes with transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer

2024· review· en· W4394618462 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueColorectal Disease · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreNOSM UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences NorthUniversity Health NetworkQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTotal mesorectal excisionMeta-analysisColorectal cancerResection marginSystematic reviewSurgeryRectumLaparoscopyGeneral surgeryMEDLINECancerResectionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Transanal total mesorectal (taTME) excision is a method used to assist in the radical removal of the rectum. By adopting the concept of natural orifice surgery, it offers potential benefits over conventional techniques. Early enthusiasm for this strategy led to its rapid and widespread adoption. The imposing of a local moratorium was precipitated by the discovery in Norway of an uncommon multifocal pattern of locoregional recurrence. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to determine the incidence of local recurrence after taTME for rectal cancer. Method Conforming to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines checklist, a systematic review and meta‐analysis was conducted. This included case series and comparative studies between taTME and preferentially laparoscopic procedures published between 2010 and 2021. Results There were a total of 1175 studies retrieved. After removal and screening for quality and relevance, the final analysis contained 40 studies. The local recurrence rate following taTME was 3.4% (95% CI 2.9%–3.9%, I 2 = 0%) in 4987 patients with follow‐up durations ranging from 0.7 to 5.5 years. Compared with laparoscopic TME, local recurrence was not statistically different for the taTME group ( p = 0.076); however, it was less probable (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.24–1.09, I 2 = 0%). Systemic recurrence and circumferential resection margin status were secondary outcomes; however, the differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion Our data suggest that the local recurrence for regular laparoscopic and transanal TME surgeries may be comparable, suggesting that taTME can be performed without influencing locoregional oncological outcomes in patients treated at specialized institutions and who have been cautiously selected.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.008
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it