Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25052129›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2015

Laparoscopic resection for large gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST): intermediate follow-up results.

Chih-Yang Hsiao, Ching-Yao Yang, I-Rue Lai, Chiung-Nien Chen, Ming-Tsan Lin

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03716089 (Prospective Controlled Clinical Trial for Comparison of Tumor Efficacy Safety in Laparoscopic Resection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Between Favorable and Unfavorable Site(FUGES-016)), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03716089 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Controlled Clinical Trial for Comparison of Tumor Efficacy Safety in Laparoscopic Resection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Between Favorable and Unfavorable Site(FUGES-016)

TypeobservationalSponsorFujian Medical UniversityRan2018 to 2027Enrolled250ConditionsGIST of Stomach, Gastric Cancer, Surgery, ComplicationArmsLaparoscopic resection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN SURGERY IN GASTRIC GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS LARGER THAN 5 CM: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Surgical treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Journal of medicine and life · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Frontiers in oncology · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Laparoscopic versus open wedge resection for gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the stomach: a meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chih-Yang HsiaoDepartment of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ching-Yao Yang
I-Rue Lai
Chiung-Nien Chen
Ming-Tsan Lin
National Taiwan University Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic wedge resection has become a widely accepted treatment for small gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) of the stomach. However, its feasibility as treatment for large gastric GIST is not known. In this retrospective study, the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric GIST (5-8 cm) were reviewed.

methodsBetween November 2002 and December 2012, a total of 39 patients with primary gastric GIST sized 5-8 cm underwent surgery at a tertiary care center, including 18 patients who underwent laparoscopic wedge resection of the stomach (Lap group) and 21 patients who underwent open wedge resection of the stomach (Open group). Clinicopathological parameters were reviewed and compared between the groups.

resultsThe demographics including age, gender, and body weight were similar between groups. The operative outcomes including blood loss, hospital stay, and surgical complications were also similar, except that operative time was longer in the Lap group (146.6 ± 50.2 vs. 113.3 ± 42.9 min in the Open group, p = 0.03). There was no tumor rupture, conversion of procedures, or major surgical morbidity in either group. The overall median follow-up time was 3.6 years (1.0-11.1). Only one patient in the Lap group had liver metastasis (4 months postoperatively). This patient remains alive 5 years later under imatinib treatment. One patient in the Open group and three patients in the Lap group have died of GIST-unrelated diseases.

conclusionsLaparoscopic wedge resection of the stomach for primary gastric GIST (5-8 cm) appears to be safe and feasible, with operative and oncological outcomes comparable to those of the open method.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAdultAgedFeasibility StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGastrectomyGastrointestinal Stromal TumorsHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesStomach NeoplasmsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25052129
OpenAlexW1966982757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.