ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Laparoscopic splenectomy for treatment of splenic marginal zone lymphoma.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for the treatment of solid abdominal and thoracic neoplasms in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- The Diagnostic Dilemma of Splenic Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Splenic Abscess: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the short-term and long-term efficacy and safety of laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) for treatment of splenic marginal zone lymphoma (SMZL).
methodsA total of 18 continuous patients who were diagnosed with SMZL and underwent LS in our department from 2008 to 2012 were reviewed. The perioperative variables and long-term follow-up were evaluated. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of this procedure better, we also included 34 patients with liver cirrhosis who underwent LS, 49 patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) who underwent LS, and 20 patients with SMZL who underwent open splenectomy (OS). The results observed in the different groups were compared.
resultsNo differences were found in the sex and Child-Pugh class of the patients in SMZL-LS, SMZL-OS, ITP, and liver cirrhosis groups. The splenic length of the patients in the SMZL-LS group was similar to that in the SMZL-OS and liver cirrhosis groups but significantly longer than in the ITP group. The SMZL-LS group had a significantly longer operating time compared with the SMZL-OS, ITP, and liver cirrhosis groups, and the SMZL-LS group exhibited significantly less blood loss compared with the SMZL-OS group. No difference was found in the length of the postoperative hospital stay between the SMZL-LS, SMZL-OS, ITP, and liver cirrhosis-LS groups. After surgery, 6 (33.3%) SMZL-LS patients suffered slight complications. During mean follow-up periods of 13.6 and 12.8 mo, one patient from the SMZL-LS group and two from the SMZL-OS group died as a result of metastasis after surgery. None of the ITP and liver cirrhosis patients died.
conclusionLS should be considered a feasible and safe procedure for treatment of SMZL in an effort to improve the treatment options and survival of patients.
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.