ArticlePloS one2014
Metastasis, risk factors and prognostic significance of splenic hilar lymph nodes in gastric adenocarcinoma.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Risk factors of lymph node metastasis in the splenic hilum of gastric cancer patients: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- The Survival Benefit and Safety of Splenectomy for Gastric Cancer With Total Gastrectomy: Updated Results.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Regional Lymph Node Metastasis Distribution in Resectable Middle-Third Gastric Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2023Article
- Efficacy of Splenectomy for Proximal Gastric Cancer with Greater Curvature Invasion or Type 4 Tumor: a Propensity Score Analysis of a Multi-Institutional Dataset.World journal of surgery · 2021Article
- Is splenic hilar lymph node dissection necessary for proximal gastric cancer surgery?Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2021Review
- Advantages of Splenic Hilar Lymph Node Dissection in Proximal Gastric Cancer Surgery.Journal of gastric cancer · 2020Review
- Disadvantages of Complete No. 10 Lymph Node Dissection in Gastric Cancer and the Possibility of Spleen-Preserving Dissection: Review.Journal of gastric cancer · 2020Review
- Effects of duodenal transection timing on clinical short-term outcomes of patients with laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy for advanced proximal gastric cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2019Article
- The Application of Spleen-Preserving Splenic Regional Laparoscopic Lymphadenectomy with Spleen Kept In Situ and Laparotomy with Spleen Lifted Out of the Abdomen for Locally Advanced Proximal Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Study.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2019Article
- Article
- Comparison of different methods of splenic hilar lymph node dissection for advanced upper- and/or middle-third gastric cancer.BMC cancer · 2016Article
- On the road to standardization of D2 lymph node dissection in a European population of patients with gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2016Review
- Comparisons Between Different Procedures of No. 10 Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer Patients With Total Gastrectomy.Medicine · 2015Observational
- Risk factors associated with splenic hilar lymph node metastasis in patients with advanced gastric cancer in northwest China.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe metastatic rate and risk factors of splenic hilar (No.10) lymph nodes (LNs) in gastric adenocarcinoma were still variable and uncertain, and the prognostic significance of No.10 LNs was also controversial. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the metastatic rate, risk factors and prognostic significance of No.10 LNs in gastric adenocarcinoma.
methodsFrom August 2007 to December 2011, 205 patients who were diagnosed with primary gastric adenocarcinoma and underwent total or proximal gastrectomy plus No.10 LNs dissection in West China Hospital were enrolled. Clinicopathological features and survival outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsMean numbers of harvested LNs and metastatic LNs were 34.8±12.6 (15-73) and 8.7±10.8 (0-67), respectively. The proportion of cases with positive No.10 LNs was 8.8% (18/205). In all 204 dissected No.10 LNs, 47 LNs (23.0%) were metastatic. In 52.2% (107/205) patients, the dissected splenic hilar tissues were histologically determined as only fat tissues but without LNs structure. Histological evidence of LNs structure was found in 98 (47.8%) patients with 18.4% (18/98) metastatic No.10 LNs. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, metastasis of No.10 LNs was significantly correlated with No.4sa LNs (p = 0.010) and pN stage (p = 0.012). Regarding survival analysis, 199 (97.1%) patients were followed up (0.6-74.8 months). In all patients with R0 resection, metastatic No.10 LNs caused significantly worse prognosis both in Kaplan-Meier (p = 0.006) and Cox regression analysis (p = 0.031).
conclusionsAlthough the metastatic rate of No.10 LNs was 8.8%, dissection of No.10 LNs might be meaningful due to the poor prognosis of positive cases. And attentions should be also paid to its correlated factors including pN stage and No.4sa LNs.
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.