ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2015
Surgical procedure determination based on tumor-node-metastasis staging of gallbladder cancer.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel model based on apparent diffusion coefficient and signal intensity on MRI to quantify subtle internal difference between tumor-adjacent and -distant liver tissues in TBMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Review
- Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC for Regionally Advanced Gallbladder Cancer: a Case Report.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Circβ-catenin promotes tumor growth and Warburg effect of gallbladder cancer by regulating STMN1 expression.Cell death discovery · 2021Article
- Site-specific metastases of gallbladder adenocarcinoma and their prognostic value for survival: a SEER-based study.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- Application of nomogram containing log odds of metastatic lymph node in gallbladder cancer patients.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- To Resect or Not to Resect Extrahepatic Bile Duct in Gallbladder Cancer?Journal of clinical medicine research · 2017Review
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the impact of surgical procedures on prognosis of gallbladder cancer patients classified with the latest tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system.
methodsA retrospective study was performed by reviewing 152 patients with primary gallbladder carcinoma treated at Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 2003 to June 2013. Postsurgical follow-up was performed by telephone and outpatient visits. Clinical records were reviewed and patients were grouped based on the new edition of TNM staging system (AJCC, seventh edition, 2010). Prognoses were analyzed and compared based on surgical operations including simple cholecystectomy, radical cholecystectomy (or extended radical cholecystectomy), and palliative surgery. Simple cholecystectomy is, by definition, resection of the gallbladder fossa. Radical cholecystectomy involves a wedge resection of the gallbladder fossa with 2 cm non-neoplastic liver tissue; resection of a suprapancreatic segment of the extrahepatic bile duct and extended portal lymph node dissection may also be considered based on the patient's circumstance. Palliative surgery refers to cholecystectomy with biliary drainage. Data analysis was performed with SPSS 19.0 software. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Logrank test were used for survival rate comparison. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsPatients were grouped based on the new 7(th) edition of TNM staging system, including 8 cases of stage 0, 10 cases of stage I, 25 cases of stage II, 21 cases of stage IIIA, 21 cases of stage IIIB, 24 cases of stage IVA, 43 cases of stage IVB. Simple cholecystectomy was performed on 28 cases, radical cholecystectomy or expanded gallbladder radical resection on 57 cases, and palliative resection on 28 cases. Thirty-nine cases were not operated. Patients with stages 0 and I disease demonstrated no statistical significant difference in survival time between those receiving radical cholecystectomy and simple cholecystectomy (P = 0.826). The prognosis of stage II patients with radical cholecystectomy was better than that of simple cholecystectomy. For stage III patients, radical cholecystectomy was significantly superior to other surgical options (P < 0.05). For stage IVA patients, radical cholecystectomy was not better than palliative resection and non-surgical treatment. For stage IVB, patients who underwent palliative resection significantly outlived those with non-surgical treatment (P < 0.01)
conclusionFor stages 0 and I patients, simple cholecystectomy is the optimal surgical procedure, while radical cholecystectomy should be actively operated for stages II and III 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.