ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2015
Lymph node pick up by separate stations: Option or necessity.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lymphadenectomy: how to do it?Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate whether lymph node pick up by separate stations could be an indicator of patients submitted to appropriate surgical treatment.
methodsOne thousand two hundred and three consecutive gastric cancer patients submitted to radical resection in 7 general hospitals and for whom no information was available on the extension of lymphatic dissection were included in this retrospective study.
resultsPatients were divided into 2 groups: group A, where the stomach specimen was directly formalin-fixed and sent to the pathologist, and group B, where lymph nodes were picked up after surgery and fixed for separate stations. Sixty-two point three percent of group A patients showed < 16 retrieved lymph nodes compared to 19.4% of group B (P < 0.0001). Group B (separate stations) patients had significantly higher survival rates than those in group A [46.1 mo (95%CI: 36.5-56.0) vs 27.7 mo (95%CI: 21.3-31.9); P = 0.0001], independently of T or N stage. In multivariate analysis, group A also showed a higher risk of death than group B (HR = 1.24; 95%CI: 1.05-1.46).
conclusionSeparate lymphatic station dissection increases the number of retrieved nodes, leads to better tumor staging, and permits verification of the surgical dissection. The number of dissected stations could potentially be used as an index to evaluate the quality of treatment received.
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.