SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2013
Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 9 of them syntheses 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Influence of enhanced recovery after surgery programs on laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.World journal of surgical oncology · 2017Pooled it
- Management of advanced gastric cancer: An overview of major findings from meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2016Pooled it
- Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: an updated meta-analysis.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Short-Term Outcomes and Completeness of Resection : Surgical Techniques in Gastric Cancer.World journal of surgery · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of totally laparoscopic versus laparoscopic assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2015Pooled it
- Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Pooled it
- Carnoy's solution increases the number of examined lymph nodes following gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma: a randomized trial.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2016Trial
- The Initiation of Laparoscopic Gastric Surgery in an Academic Hospital in Greece: Early Results.Cureus · 2026Article
- Article
- Relaparoscopy in the management of post-operative complications after minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Laparoscopic vs. Open Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Case-Control Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal and gastric cancer under the Chinese multi-site practice policy: admittance standards of competence are needed.Gastroenterology report · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of suction-tip forceps, a new tool for laparoscopic surgery, for gastric cancer.Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2021Article
- Short- and long-term survival after laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: a National database study.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Comparison of open and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a low volume center experience.Turkish journal of surgery · 2021Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains a controversial topic, mainly because of doubts about its oncologic validity. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence.
methodsA comprehensive search was performed until June 2013 to identify comparative studies evaluating survival rates, recurrence rates, surgical outcomes and complications. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects model. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.1 software.
resultsFifteen trials were involved in this analysis. Compared to open gastrectomy (OG), LG involved a longer operating time (WMD = 48.67 min, 95% CI 34.09 to 63.26, P < 0.001); less blood loss (WMD = -139.01 ml, 95% CI -174.57 to -103.44, P < 0.001); earlier time to flatus (WMD = -0.79 days, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.44, P < 0.001); shorter hospital stay (WMD = -3.11 days, 95% CI -4.13 to -2.09, P < 0.001); and a decrease in complications (RR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.90, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the number of harvested lymph nodes, margin distance, mortality, cancer recurrence rate and long-term survival rate between the AGC patients treated with LG or OG (P > 0.05).
conclusionsDespite a longer operation, LG is a safe technical alternative to OG for AGC with a lower complication rate and enhanced postoperative recovery. Moreover, there were similar outcomes between both approaches in terms of cancer recurrence and the long-term survival rate. Because of the limitation of this study, methodologically high-quality studies are needed for further evaluation.
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.