{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019064124783362217, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0034662045060658577, 'mean_word_length': 5.311475409836065, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Author response to: Comment on: Prognosis of patients with colonic carcinoma before, during and after implementation of complete mesocolic excision

The main purpose of our paper1 was to demonstrate the internal quality management programme applied in our department to improve oncologic outcome of colon cancer continuously over the years. Adequate lymph node dissection is just one part of oncologic surgery; plane preservation and multivisceral en bloc resections are the two other important objectives. All that needs to be embedded in a quality management system. In this article, we have not mentioned photo documentation, which is certainly the best surrogate for immediate prediction of outcome. We have published on this subject elsewhere2,3. We thank the colleagues from Modena as they have produced one more argument to perform a complete mesocolic excision (CME). However, their arguments are obviously based upon sophisticated technologies, which may need specific skills and are not part of routine practice, at least at the present time. This aspect of the ‘CME story’ emphasizes the increasing interest in the management of colon cancer4.