OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the efficacy and mechanisms of Qingjie Fuzheng Granules (QFG) in inhibiting colitis-associated colorectal cancer (CAC) development via RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) and 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) correlation analysis. METHODS: CAC was induced in BALB/c mice using azoxymethane (AOM) and dextran sulfate sodium (DSS), and QFG was administered orally to the treatment group. The effects of QFG on CAC were evaluated using disease index, histology, and serum T-cell ratios. RNA-seq and 16S rRNA analysis assessed the transcriptome and microbiome change. Key pharmacodynamic pathways were identified by integrating these data and confirmed via Western blotting and immunofluorescence. The link between microbiota and CAC-related markers was explored using linear discriminant analysis effect size and Spearman correlation analysis. RESULTS: Long-term treatment with QFG prevented AOM/DSS-induced CAC formation, reduced levels of interleukin (IL)-1β, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), IL-6, and interferon γ (IFN-γ), and increased CD3⁺ and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T cells ratio, without causing hepatic or renal toxicity. A 16S rRNA analysis revealed that QFG rebalanced the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio and mitigated AOM/DSS-induced microbiota disturbances. Transcriptomics and Western blotting analysis identified the nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain-containing protein 2 (NOD2)/nuclear factor kappa-B (NF-κB) pathway as key for QFG's treatment against CAC. Furthermore, QFG decreased the abundance of Bacilli, Bacillales, Staphylococcaceae, Staphylococcus, Lactobacillales, Aerococcus, Alloprevotella, and Akkermansia, while increasing Clostridiales, Lachnospiraceae, Lachnospiraceae_NK4A136_group, Ruminococcaceae, and Muribaculaceae, which were highly correlated with CAC-related markers or NOD2/NF-κB pathway. CONCLUSION By mapping the relationships between CAC, immune responses, microbiota, and key pathways, this study clarifies the mechanism of QFG in inhibiting CAC, highlighting its potential for clinical use as preventive therapy.

Osteoporosis is a prevalent skeletal condition characterized by reduced bone mass and strength, leading to increased fragility. Buqi-Tongluo (BQTL) decoction, a traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) prescription, has yet to be fully evaluated for its potential in treating bone diseases such as osteoporosis. To investigate the mechanism by which BQTL decoction inhibits osteoclast differentiation in vitro and validate these findings through in vivo experiments. We employed MTS assays to assess the potential proliferative or toxic effects of BQTL on bone marrow macrophages (BMMs) at various concentrations. TRAcP experiments were conducted to examine BQTL's impact on osteoclast differentiation. RT-PCR and Western blot analyses were utilized to evaluate the relative expression levels of osteoclast-specific genes and proteins under BQTL stimulation. Finally, in vivo experiments were performed using an osteoporosis model to further validate the in vitro findings. This study revealed that BQTL suppressed receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL)-induced osteoclastogenesis and osteoclast resorption activity in vitro in a dose-dependent manner without observable cytotoxicity. The inhibitory effects of BQTL on osteoclast formation and function were attributed to the downregulation of NFATc1 and c-fos activity, primarily through attenuation of the MAPK, NF-κB, and Calcineurin signaling pathways. BQTL's inhibitory capacity was further examined in vivo using an ovariectomized (OVX) rat model, demonstrating a strong protective effect against bone loss. BQTL may serve as an effective therapeutic TCM for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis and the alleviation of bone loss induced by estrogen deficiency and related conditions.
Animals ; NFATC Transcription Factors/genetics* ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/pharmacology* ; Ovariectomy ; Osteoclasts/metabolism* ; Female ; Osteogenesis/drug effects* ; Rats, Sprague-Dawley ; Rats ; NF-kappa B/genetics* ; Osteoporosis/genetics* ; Signal Transduction/drug effects* ; Bone Resorption/genetics* ; Cell Differentiation/drug effects* ; Humans ; RANK Ligand/metabolism* ; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinases/genetics* ; Transcription Factors

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) combined with lower cervical fracture is often categorized into unstable fracture, with a high incidence of neurological injury and a high rate of disability and morbidity. As factors such as shoulder occlusion may affect the accuracy of X-ray imaging diagnosis, it is often easily misdiagnosed at the primary diagnosis. Non-operative treatment has complications such as bone nonunion and the possibility of secondary neurological damage, while the timing, access and choice of surgical treatment are still controversial. Currently, there are no clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of AS combined with lower cervical fracture with or without dislocation. To this end, the Spinal Trauma Group of Orthopedics Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association organized experts to formulate Clinical guidelines for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis combined with lower cervical fracture in adults ( version 2024) in accordance with the principles of evidence-based medicine, scientificity and practicality, in which 11 recommendations were put forward in terms of the diagnosis, imaging evaluation, typing and treatment, etc, to provide guidance for the diagnosis and treatment of AS combined with lower cervical fracture.

Endodontic diseases are a kind of chronic infectious oral disease.Common endodontic treatment concepts are based on the removal of inflamed or necrotic pulp tissue and the replacement by gutta-percha.However,it is very essential for endodontic treatment to debride the root canal system and prevent the root canal system from bacterial reinfection after root canal therapy(RCT).Recent research,encompassing bacterial etiology and advanced imaging techniques,contributes to our understanding of the root canal system's anatomy intricacies and the technique sensitivity of RCT.Success in RCT hinges on factors like patients,infection severity,root canal anatomy,and treatment techniques.Therefore,improving disease management is a key issue to combat endodontic diseases and cure periapical lesions.The clinical difficulty assessment system of RCT is established based on patient conditions,tooth conditions,root canal configuration,and root canal needing retreatment,and emphasizes pre-treatment risk assessment for optimal outcomes.The findings suggest that the presence of risk factors may correlate with the challenge of achieving the high standard required for RCT.These insights contribute not only to improve education but also aid practitioners in treatment planning and referral decision-making within the field of endodontics.

Objective:To investigate the interactive effect of mismatch repair (MMR) protein status and adverse clinicopathological features on prognosis of stage Ⅰ-Ⅲ colon cancer.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 1 650 patients with colon cancer of stage Ⅰ-Ⅲ who were admitted to 7 hospitals in China from January 2016 to December 2017 were collected. There were 963 males and 687 females, aged 62(53,71)years. Patients were classified as 230 cases of MMR deficiency (dMMR) and 1 420 cases of MMR proficiency (pMMR) based on their MMR protein status. Observation indicators: (1) comparison of clinicopathological characteristics between patients of different MMR protein status; (2) analysis of factors affecting the survival outcomes of patients of dMMR; (3) analysis of factors affecting the survival outcomes of patients of pMMR; (4) interaction analysis of MMR and adverse clinicopathological features on survival outcomes. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the independent t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M( Q1, Q3), and comparison between groups was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Count data were described as absolute numbers, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Comparison of ordinal data was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. The random forest interpolation method was used for missing values in data interpolation. Univariate analysis was conducted using the COX proportional risk regression model, and multivariate analysis was conducted using the COX stepwise regression with forward method. The coefficient of multiplication interaction effect was obtained using the interaction term coefficient of COX proportional risk regression model. Evaluation of additive interaction effects was conducted using the relative excess risk due to interaction ( RERI). Results:(1) Comparison of clinicopathological characteristics between patients of different MMR protein status. There were significant differences in age, T staging, the number of lymph node harvest, the number of lymph node harvest <12, high grade tumor between patients of dMMR and pMMR ( P<0.05). (2) Analysis of factors affecting the survival outcomes of patients of dMMR. Results of multivariate analysis showed that T staging, N staging, the number of lymph node harvest <12 were independent factors affecting the disease-free survival (DFS) of colon cancer patients of dMMR ( hazard ratio=3.548, 2.589, 6.702, 95% confidence interval as 1.460-8.620, 1.064-6.301, 1.886-23.813, P<0.05). Age and N staging were independent factors affecting the overall survival (OS) of colon cancer patients of dMMR ( hazard ratio=1.073, 10.684, 95% confidence interval as 1.021-1.126, 2.311-49.404, P<0.05). (3) Analysis of factors affecting the survival outcomes of patients of pMMR. Results of multivariate analysis showed that age, T staging, N staging, vascular tumor thrombus were independent factors affecting the DFS of colon cancer patients of pMMR ( hazard ratio=1.018, 2.214, 2.598, 1.549, 95% confidence interval as 1.006-1.030, 1.618-3.030, 1.921-3.513, 1.118-2.147, P<0.05). Age, T staging, N staging, high grade tumor were independent factors affecting the OS of colon cancer patients of pMMR ( hazard ratio=1.036, 2.080, 2.591, 1.615, 95% confidence interval as 1.020-1.052, 1.407-3.075, 1.791-3.748, 1.114-2.341, P<0.05). (4) Interaction analysis of MMR and adverse clinicopathological features on survival outcomes. Results of interaction analysis showed that the multiplication interaction effect between the number of lymph node harvest <12 and MMR protein status was significant on DFS of colon cancer patients ( hazard ratio=3.923, 95% confidence interval as 1.057-14.555, P<0.05). The additive interaction effects between age and MMR protein status, between high grade tumor and MMR protein status were significant on OS of colon cancer patients ( RERI=-0.033, -1.304, 95% confidence interval as -0.049 to -0.018, -2.462 to -0.146). Conclusions:There is an interaction between the MMR protein status and the adverse clinicopathological features (the number of lymph node harvest <12, high grade tumor) on prognosis of colon cancer patients of stage Ⅰ-Ⅲ. In patients of dMMR, the number of lymph node harvest <12 has a stronger predictive effect on poor prognosis. In patients of pMMR, the high grade tumor has a stronger predictive effect on poor prognosis.

Objective:To analyze the differences in clinicopathological features of colon cancers and survival between patients with right- versus left-sided colon cancers.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study. Information on patients with colon cancer from January 2016 to August 2020 was collected from the prospective registry database at Peking Union Medical College Hospital . Primary tumors located in the cecum, ascending colon, and proximal two‐thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided colon cancers (RCCs), whereas primary tumors located in the distal third of the transverse colon, descending colon, or sigmoid colon were defined as left‐sided colon cancers (LCCs). Clinicopathological features were compared using the χ 2 test or Mann‐Whitney U test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan‐Meier curves and the log‐rank test. Factors that differed significantly between the two groups were identified by multivariate survival analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards function. One propensity score matching was performed to eliminate the effects of confounding factors. Results:The study cohort comprised 856 patients, with TNM Stage I disease, 391 (45.7%) with Stage II, and 336 (39.3%) with Stage III, including 442 (51.6%) with LCC and 414 (48.4%) with RCC and 129 (15.1%). Defective mismatch repair (dMMR) was identified in 139 patients (16.2%). Compared with RCC, the proportion of men (274/442 [62.0%] vs. 224/414 [54.1%], χ 2=5.462, P=0.019), body mass index (24.2 [21.9, 26.6] kg/m 2 vs. 23.2 [21.3, 25.5] kg/m 2, U=78,789.0, P<0.001), and well/moderately differentiated cancer (412/442 [93.2%] vs. 344/414 [83.1%], χ 2=22.266, P<0.001) were higher in the LCC than the RCC group. In contrast, the proportion of dMMR (40/442 [9.0%] vs. 99/414 [23.9%], χ 2=34.721, P<0.001) and combined vascular invasion (106/442[24.0%] vs. 125/414[30.2%], χ 2=4.186, P=0.041) were lower in the LCC than RCC group. The median follow‐up time for all patients was 48 (range 33, 59) months. The log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) ( P=0.668) or overall survival (OS) ( P=0.828) between patients with LCC versus RCC. Cox proportional hazards model showed that dMMR was significantly associated with a longer DFS (HR=0.419, 95%CI: 0.204?0.862, P=0.018), whereas a higher proportion of T3‐4 (HR=2.178, 95%CI: 1.089?4.359, P=0.028), N+ (HR=2.126, 95%CI: 1.443?3.133, P<0.001), and perineural invasion (HR=1.835, 95%CI: 1.115?3.020, P=0.017) were associated with poor DFS. Tumor location was not associated with DFS or OS (all P>0.05). Subsequent analysis showed that RCC patients with dMMR had longer DFS than did RCC patients with pMMR (HR=0.338, 95%CI: 0.146?0.786, P=0.012). However, the difference in OS between the two groups was not statistically significant (HR=0.340, 95%CI:0.103?1.119, P=0.076). After propensity score matching for independent risk factors for DFS, the log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in DFS ( P=0.343) or OS ( P=0.658) between patients with LCC versus RCC, whereas patient with dMMR had better DFS ( P=0.047) and OS ( P=0.040) than did patients with pMMR. Conclusions:Tumor location is associated with differences in clinicopathological features; however, this has no impact on survival. dMMR status is significantly associated with longer survival: this association may be stronger in RCC patients.

Objective:To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research.Methods:This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2–T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared.Results:The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m 2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ 2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ 2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ 2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group ( Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group ( Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.

Objective:To investigate the clinical characteristics of brain metastases after radical surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).Methods:The clinical characteristics of LARC with brain metastases treated in the Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital from 2013 to 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The inclusion criteria were rectal adenocarcinoma within 15 cm of the anal verge and having undergone radical surgery, and the exclusion criterion was primary malignant tumor of the brain. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and disease-specific overall survival (determined as the interval between occurrence of brain metastasis to death from any causes). The Kaplan–Meier method was used for survival analysis.Results:We identified 4500 patients with LARC, 20 (0.4%) of whom had brain metastases. The mean age of patients with brain metastases was 63.8±9.3 years. They comprised five women and 15 men. The brain was the first site of metastasis in four patients (20%) whereas 18 patients had heterochronous extracranial metastases before brain metastasis. Two patients also had multi-organ metastases. The most common manifestations of brain metastases were dizziness and headache (five patients, 25%), sudden onset of limb weakness (four, 20%), sudden speech impairment (two, 10%), and polyopia (two, 10%). The metastases were diagnosed during follow-up in three patients (15%). Four of the patients were asymptomatic (20%). Treatment approaches included surgical resection (six patients, 30%), chemoradiotherapy (nine, 45%), and palliative (five, 25%). The median follow-up time was 45.5 (4–112) months until October 2023. 1y-OS, 3y-OS, and 5y-OS were 95.0%, 62.9%, and 43.3%, respectively. 1y-DFS, 3y-DFS, and 5y-DFS were 55.0%, 25.0%, and 5.0%, respectively. With brain metastasis as the starting point, the median duration of survival was 16 (10.2–21.8) months.Conclusion:The incidence of brain metastasis is relatively low in patients with LARC, who often have multiple synchronous extracranial metastases. Brain metastases lack specific manifestations and more often occur in male patients. Surgical intervention or combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy may improve disease-specific survival to a certain extent. However, the overall prognosis remains poor.

Objective:To analyze the differences in clinicopathological features of colon cancers and survival between patients with right- versus left-sided colon cancers.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study. Information on patients with colon cancer from January 2016 to August 2020 was collected from the prospective registry database at Peking Union Medical College Hospital . Primary tumors located in the cecum, ascending colon, and proximal two‐thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided colon cancers (RCCs), whereas primary tumors located in the distal third of the transverse colon, descending colon, or sigmoid colon were defined as left‐sided colon cancers (LCCs). Clinicopathological features were compared using the χ 2 test or Mann‐Whitney U test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan‐Meier curves and the log‐rank test. Factors that differed significantly between the two groups were identified by multivariate survival analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards function. One propensity score matching was performed to eliminate the effects of confounding factors. Results:The study cohort comprised 856 patients, with TNM Stage I disease, 391 (45.7%) with Stage II, and 336 (39.3%) with Stage III, including 442 (51.6%) with LCC and 414 (48.4%) with RCC and 129 (15.1%). Defective mismatch repair (dMMR) was identified in 139 patients (16.2%). Compared with RCC, the proportion of men (274/442 [62.0%] vs. 224/414 [54.1%], χ 2=5.462, P=0.019), body mass index (24.2 [21.9, 26.6] kg/m 2 vs. 23.2 [21.3, 25.5] kg/m 2, U=78,789.0, P<0.001), and well/moderately differentiated cancer (412/442 [93.2%] vs. 344/414 [83.1%], χ 2=22.266, P<0.001) were higher in the LCC than the RCC group. In contrast, the proportion of dMMR (40/442 [9.0%] vs. 99/414 [23.9%], χ 2=34.721, P<0.001) and combined vascular invasion (106/442[24.0%] vs. 125/414[30.2%], χ 2=4.186, P=0.041) were lower in the LCC than RCC group. The median follow‐up time for all patients was 48 (range 33, 59) months. The log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) ( P=0.668) or overall survival (OS) ( P=0.828) between patients with LCC versus RCC. Cox proportional hazards model showed that dMMR was significantly associated with a longer DFS (HR=0.419, 95%CI: 0.204?0.862, P=0.018), whereas a higher proportion of T3‐4 (HR=2.178, 95%CI: 1.089?4.359, P=0.028), N+ (HR=2.126, 95%CI: 1.443?3.133, P<0.001), and perineural invasion (HR=1.835, 95%CI: 1.115?3.020, P=0.017) were associated with poor DFS. Tumor location was not associated with DFS or OS (all P>0.05). Subsequent analysis showed that RCC patients with dMMR had longer DFS than did RCC patients with pMMR (HR=0.338, 95%CI: 0.146?0.786, P=0.012). However, the difference in OS between the two groups was not statistically significant (HR=0.340, 95%CI:0.103?1.119, P=0.076). After propensity score matching for independent risk factors for DFS, the log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in DFS ( P=0.343) or OS ( P=0.658) between patients with LCC versus RCC, whereas patient with dMMR had better DFS ( P=0.047) and OS ( P=0.040) than did patients with pMMR. Conclusions:Tumor location is associated with differences in clinicopathological features; however, this has no impact on survival. dMMR status is significantly associated with longer survival: this association may be stronger in RCC patients.

Objective:To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research.Methods:This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2–T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared.Results:The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m 2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ 2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ 2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ 2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group ( Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group ( Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.