Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27383694›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016

Diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

Victoria B Allen, Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy, Yemisi Takwoingi, Amun Kalia, Brian R Davidson

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05340569 (Diagnostic Value of Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detection of Peritoneal Metastases in High-risk Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 54 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05340569 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Diagnostic Value of Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detection of Peritoneal Metastases in High-risk Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: a Pilot Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaval UniversityRan2022 to 2024Enrolled40ConditionsPancreas Cancer, Duct Cell Adenocarcinoma, Pancreas Adenocarcinoma, Peritoneal Metastases, Peritoneal CarcinomatosisArmsWhole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. First-in-human EphA2-targeting PET imaging with the bicyclic radiotracer [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Surgical management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a narrative review.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Victoria B AllenOxford University Clinical Academic Graduate School, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK, OX3 9DU.
Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Yemisi Takwoingi
Amun Kalia
Brian R Davidson

Funding

Department of Health 10/4001/11Department of Health 13/89/03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancer. A considerable proportion of patients undergo unnecessary laparotomy because of underestimation of the extent of the cancer on computed tomography (CT) scanning. Laparoscopy can detect metastases not visualised on CT scanning, enabling better assessment of the spread of cancer (staging of cancer). This is an update to a previous Cochrane Review published in 2013 evaluating the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in assessing the resectability with curative intent in people with pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

objectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy performed as an add-on test to CT scanning in the assessment of curative resectability in pancreatic and periampullary cancer. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via OvidSP (from inception to 15 May 2016), and Science Citation Index Expanded (from 1980 to 15 May 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included diagnostic accuracy studies of diagnostic laparoscopy in people with potentially resectable pancreatic and periampullary cancer on CT scan, where confirmation of liver or peritoneal involvement was by histopathological examination of suspicious (liver or peritoneal) lesions obtained at diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy. We accepted any criteria of resectability used in the studies. We included studies irrespective of language, publication status, or study design (prospective or retrospective). We excluded case-control studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. The specificity of diagnostic laparoscopy in all studies was 1 because there were no false positives since laparoscopy and the reference standard are one and the same if histological examination after diagnostic laparoscopy is positive. The sensitivities were therefore meta-analysed using a univariate random-effects logistic regression model. The probability of unresectability in people who had a negative laparoscopy (post-test probability for people with a negative test result) was calculated using the median probability of unresectability (pre-test probability) from the included studies, and the negative likelihood ratio derived from the model (specificity of 1 assumed). The difference between the pre-test and post-test probabilities gave the overall added value of diagnostic laparoscopy compared to the standard practice of CT scan staging alone. MAIN

resultsWe included 16 studies with a total of 1146 participants in the meta-analysis. Only one study including 52 participants had a low risk of bias and low applicability concern in the patient selection domain. The median pre-test probability of unresectable disease after CT scanning across studies was 41.4% (that is 41 out of 100 participants who had resectable cancer after CT scan were found to have unresectable disease on laparotomy). The summary sensitivity of diagnostic laparoscopy was 64.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 50.1% to 76.6%). Assuming a pre-test probability of 41.4%, the post-test probability of unresectable disease for participants with a negative test result was 0.20 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.27). This indicates that if a person is said to have resectable disease after diagnostic laparoscopy and CT scan, there is a 20% probability that their cancer will be unresectable compared to a 41% probability for those receiving CT alone.A subgroup analysis of people with pancreatic cancer gave a summary sensitivity of 67.9% (95% CI 41.1% to 86.5%). The post-test probability of unresectable disease after being considered resectable on both CT and diagnostic laparoscopy was 18% compared to 40.0% for those receiving CT alone. AUTHORS'

conclusionsDiagnostic laparoscopy may decrease the rate of unnecessary laparotomy in people with pancreatic and periampullary cancer found to have resectable disease on CT scan. On average, using diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy and histopathological confirmation of suspicious lesions prior to laparotomy would avoid 21 unnecessary laparotomies in 100 people in whom resection of cancer with curative intent is planned.

Indexed as

Ampulla of VaterUnnecessary ProceduresCommon Bile Duct NeoplasmsHumansLaparoscopyLaparotomyNeoplasm StagingPancreatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID27383694
PMCPMC6458011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.