ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Determining the extent of cholecystectomy using intraoperative specimen ultrasonography in patients with suspected early gallbladder cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic total biopsy for suspected gallbladder cancer: A case series.Health science reports · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic treatment for suspected gallbladder cancer confined to the wall: a 10-year study from a single institution.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccumulating evidence and guidelines recommend extended cholecystectomy for T1b or greater gallbladder cancers. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of intraoperative ultrasonography of a resected gallbladder specimen (specimen US) for the determination of the extent of cholecystectomy.
methodsWe included 45 patients (34 women; median [interquartile range] age, 66 [57-74] years) who underwent specimen US. After simple laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a gallbladder specimen was examined to evaluate the depth of tumor invasion by specimen US and frozen section examination. With the results of those two examinations, the operating surgeon decided whether to perform extended cholecystectomy. The sensitivity and specificity of specimen US and frozen section examination in diagnosing T1b or greater cancer were, respectively, measured using permanent pathology as the reference standard. The surgeons' final decisions were evaluated in the same manner as the intraoperative examinations.
resultsAmong 22 patients in whom adenocarcinomas were confirmed, 17 patients had T1b or greater cancers. The sensitivity and specificity of specimen US alone were 81 % (95 % CI, 54-96 %) and 85 % (65-96 %), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of frozen section examination alone were 43 % (10-82 %) and 95 % (75-100 %), respectively. Except one patient in whom extended cholecystectomy was intentionally not performed, 14 out of 16 patients (88 %; 95 % CI, 62-98 %) who were finally confirmed as having T1b or greater cancers underwent extended cholecystectomy by the surgeons' decision based on both specimen US and frozen examination. Out of 28 patients who were finally confirmed as having benign lesions or T1a cancers, 25 (89 %; 72-98 %) underwent simple cholecystectomy.
conclusionSpecimen US was feasible to be incorporated in clinical practice. Although the diagnostic accuracy of specimen US alone was moderate, the combined use of specimen US and frozen section examination could help the surgeons make correct decisions on the extent of cholecystectomy.
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.