Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26885048›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015

Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open radical resection of gastric remnant cancer: a clinical comparison.

Guo-De Luo, Bao-Hua Chen, Yong-Kuan Cao, Jia-Qing Gong, Shan-Hong Tang, Yun-Ming Li

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Guo-De LuoDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Liberation Army General Hospital of Chengdu Command Chengdu 610083, Sichuan Province, China.
Bao-Hua ChenDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Liberation Army 184 Hospital Yingtan 33500, Jiangxi Province, China.
Yong-Kuan CaoDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Liberation Army General Hospital of Chengdu Command Chengdu 610083, Sichuan Province, China.
Jia-Qing GongDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Liberation Army General Hospital of Chengdu Command Chengdu 610083, Sichuan Province, China.
Shan-Hong TangDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Liberation Army General Hospital of Chengdu Command Chengdu 610083, Sichuan Province, China.
Yun-Ming LiDepartment of General Surgery, The People's Liberation Army General Hospital of Chengdu Command Chengdu 610083, Sichuan Province, China.
Chengdu Military General Hospital · CNPeople's Liberation Army No. 150 Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the perioperative clinical data between hand-assisted laparoscopic and open radical resection of gastric remnant cancer, and analyze the feasibility and advantages of hand-assisted laparoscopic resection of gastric remnant cancer.

methodsThe clinical data of 18 patients with gastric remnant cancer who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (n=9) or open surgery (n=9) were retrospectively analyzed to compare the perioperative outcomes and recovery between December 2007 and October 2014.

resultsAll 18 patients underwent surgery without post-operative complications. In the hand-assisted laparoscopy group, none required conversion to open surgery, and no intraoperative auxiliary injury occurred. The incision length was (8.78±0.62) cm in the hand-assisted laparoscopy group, and (14.06±0.81) cm in the open surgery group (t=15.565, P=0.000). The duration of the operation averaged (221.11±19.48) min in the hand-assisted laparoscopy group, and (212.89±14.30) min in the open surgery group (t=-1.021, P=0.323). The intraoperative blood loss was (105.56±35.04) ml in the hand-assisted laparoscopy group, and (147.78±41.92) ml in the open surgery group (t=2.319, P=0.034). The number of lymph nodes scavenged was (16.22±2.99) and 16.67±3.28 in the hand-assisted laparoscopy group and in the open surgery group, respectively (t=-.300, P=0.768). The postoperative time to passage of gas by anus was (68.67±10.00) hr in the hand-assisted laparoscopy group, and (79.78±9.16) hr in the open surgery group (t=2.458, P=0.026). Mild postoperative hemorrhage occurred at the anastomotic site in one patient in each surgery group. These complications resolved after treatment. And no serious perioperative complications, such as anastomotic site fistula, massive hemorrhage in the peritoneal cavity or digestive tract or death occurred in either group.

conclusionsHand-assisted laparoscopic radical resection of gastric remnant cancer is feasible, is of comparable efficacy to open surgery, and offers several advantages including small incisions, mild intraoperative hemorrhage, rapid postoperative recovery, and few postoperative complications.

Indexed as

gastric remnant cancerHand-assisted laparoscopicopen surgeryradical resection

Identifiers

PMID26885048
PMCPMC4723893
OpenAlexW2398060588

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.