Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25791064›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2015

Minimally invasive gastrectomy for cancer: current utilization in US academic medical centers.

Jason A Glenn, Kiran K Turaga, T Clark Gamblin, Samuel F Hohmann, Fabian M Johnston

Abstract read
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. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. A Simplified Two-Step Technique for Extended Lymphadenectomy During Resection of Gastroesophageal Malignancy: Early Results Compared to En Bloc Dissection.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy and Side-to-Side Stapled Esophagojejunostomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2016
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Robot-assisted surgery for gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2016
    Review
  17. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jason A GlennDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 9200 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA. jglenn@mcw.edu.
Kiran K TuragaDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 9200 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
T Clark GamblinDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 9200 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
Samuel F HohmannUniversity HealthSystem Consortium, 155 N Upper Wacker Dr, Chicago, IL, 60606, USA.
Fabian M JohnstonDivision of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 9200 W. Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA. fjohnston@mcw.edu.
Medical College of Wisconsin · USWacker (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternationally, the utilization of minimally invasive techniques for gastric cancer resection has been increasing since first introduced in 1994. In the USA, the feasibility and safety of these techniques for cancer have not yet been demonstrated.

methodsThe University HealthSystem Consortium database was queried for gastrectomies performed between 2008 and 2013. Any adult patient with an abdominal visceral malignancy that necessitated gastric resection was included in the cohort. Clinicopathological and in-hospital outcome metrics were collected for open, laparoscopic, and robotic procedures.

resultsOpen gastrectomies comprised 89.5% of the total study group, while 8.2% of procedures were performed laparoscopically, and 2.3% were performed with robotic assistance. When accounting for disparities in patient severity of illness and risk of mortality subclass designations, there were no significant differences in mean length of stay, 30-day readmission, and in-hospital mortality between the three groups; however, mean total cost was highest in the robotic-assisted group (P = 0.017). Overall, complication rates were also similar; however, there was a higher incidence of superficial infection in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.013) and a higher incidence of venous thromboembolism in the robotic group (P = 0.038).

conclusionDespite widespread adoption for benign indications, minimally invasive gastrectomy for cancer remains underutilized in the USA. In these patients, laparoscopic and robot-assisted gastrectomies appear to be comparable to open resection with respect to overall complications, length of stay, 30-day readmission, and in-hospital mortality. However, when employing minimally invasive techniques, infection and thromboembolism risk reduction strategies should be emphasized in the operative and postoperative periods.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGastrectomyHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresStomach NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesCancerDigestiveGIHuman/roboticSurgical

Identifiers

PMID25791064
OpenAlexW2051468376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.