ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2012
Analysis of sentinel lymph node biopsy results in colon cancer in regard of the anthropometric features of the population and body composition assessment formulas.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of different algorithms for ideal body weight on screening for hydroxychloroquine retinopathy in women.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2014Article
- Extended lymphadenectomy in colon cancer is debatable.World journal of surgery · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the study was to assess sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) results in colon cancer (CC) regarding basic anthropometric features of the studied population and their derivatives calculated using mathematical formulas.
methodsOne hundred three SLNBs in CC have been analysed. Various indicators were calculated for every patient using mathematical formulas: BMI, Roher's index, lean body weight, body fat percentage and body weight/ideal body weight for a given height ratios using the following formulas: Broca's, Broca's ideal weight, Broca-Brugsch, Lorenz's, Potton's, Devine's, Robinson's, Miller's and Hamwi. The results were compared with accuracy, sensitivity and false negative results percentage by means of ROC curves and the test for structure indicators (for determined cut-off points).
resultsNo statistically significant relationship between the results and patients' sex or age were found. ROC curve analysis did not reveal statistically significant relationships between the obtained results and indicators calculated on the basis of growth and weigh (all p > 0.05). The analyses of sensitivity and accuracy with determined cut-off point, in spite of differences amounting to 19 % (analysis of lean body weight/weight ratio), showed no statistical significance for any of the relationships (all p > 0.05).
conclusionsNo indicator with high diagnostic and prognostic value has been found. The problem of qualifying patients for SLNB in CC in regard of the anthropometric features of the population and body composition assessment formulas remains open and requires further analysis on larger populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.