SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Extent of lymph node dissection for adenocarcinoma of the stomach.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 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
53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 102 citations in OpenAlex.
- Roux-en-Y versus Billroth-I reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Surgical Anatomy of the Superior Mesenteric Vessels Related to Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2018Pooled it
- Relationship Between Postoperative Complications and the Prognosis of Gastric Carcinoma Patients Who Underwent Surgical Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterPooled it
- One-Stage Versus Two-Stage Gastrectomy for Perforated Gastric Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Effect of Indocyanine Green-Guided Lymphadenectomy During Gastrectomy on Survival: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2025Review
- D2 Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer: Advancements and Technical Considerations.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Review
- The Role of Lymphadenectomy in the Surgical Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2024Review
- Optimal lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: a narrative review.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Review
- ASO Author Reflections: Effect of the Number of Examined Lymph Nodes on Survival in Gastric Signet-Ring Cell Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Impact of Removal of Lymph Nodes on Survival in Stage I-III Gastric Signet-Ring Cell Cancer: The More, the Better?Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Review
- PROFESSOR JOAQUIM JOSÉ GAMA-RODRIGUES. FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE BRAZILIAN COLLEGE OF DIGESTIVE SURGERY.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Article
- Current standards of lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer.Updates in surgery · 2023Review
- Prognostic factors and the necessity of chemotherapy for stage II gastric cancer: a model based on multicenter retrospective study.Discover oncology · 2023Article
- pT1-2 gastric cancer with lymph node metastasis predicted by tumor morphologic features on contrast-enhanced computed tomographyDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2023Article
- Review
- Gastric neuroendocrine neoplasms: a primer for radiologists.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2022Review
- Surgical considerations and outcomes of minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer resection.Cancer · 2022Review
- Open and minimally invasive gastrectomy in Eastern and Western patient populations: A review of the literature and reasons for differences in outcomes.Journal of surgical oncology · 2022Review
- Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Gastric Cancer in Western Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of lymphadenectomy extent on the survival of patients with primary resectable gastric carcinoma is debated.
objectivesWe aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the evidence on the impact of the three main types of progressively more extended lymph node dissection (that is, D1, D2 and D3 lymphadenectomy) on the clinical outcome of patients with primary resectable carcinoma of the stomach. The primary objective was to assess the impact of lymphadenectomy extent on survival (overall survival [OS], disease specific survival [DSS] and disease free survival [DFS]). The secondary aim was to assess the impact of lymphadenectomy on post-operative mortality. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE until 2001, including references from relevant articles and conference proceedings. We also contacted known researchers in the field. For the updated review, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 2001 to February 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the three main types of lymph node dissection (i.e., D1, D2 and D3 lymphadenectomy) in patients with primary non-metastatic resectable carcinoma of the stomach. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data from the included studies. Hazard ratios (HR) and relative risks (RR) along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to measure differences in survival and mortality rates between trial arms, respectively. Potential sources of between-study heterogeneity were investigated by means of subgroup and sensitivity analyses. The same two authors independently assessed the risk of bias of eligible studies according to the standards of the Cochrane Collaboration and the quality of the overall evidence based on the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. MAIN
resultsEight RCTs (enrolling 2515 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Three RCTs (all performed in Asian countries) compared D3 with D2 lymphadenectomy: data suggested no significant difference in OS between these two types of lymph node dissection (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21), with no significant difference in postoperative mortality (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.41 to 6.73). Data for DFS were available only from one trial and for no trial were DSS data available. Five RCTs (n = 3 European; n = 2 Asian) compared D2 to D1 lymphadenectomy: OS (n = 5; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.17) and DFS (n=3; HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.07) findings suggested no significant difference between these two types of lymph node dissection. In contrast, D2 lymphadenectomy was associated with a significantly better DSS compared to D1 lymphadenectomy (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.92), the quality of the body of evidence being moderate; however, D2 lymphadenectomy was also associated with a higher postoperative mortality rate (RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.04). AUTHORS'
conclusionsD2 lymphadenectomy can improve DSS in patients with resectable carcinoma of the stomach, although the increased incidence of postoperative mortality reduces its therapeutic benefit.
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.