ArticleMedicine2016
Two-dimensional assessment of submillimeter cancer-free margin area in colorectal liver metastases.
Article in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Prognostic Impact of Surgical Margin Width in Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastasis.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2023Review
- Infiltrative Tumor Borders in Colorectal Liver Metastasis: Should We Enlarge Margin Size?Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Prospective Non-Randomized Study of Intraoperative Assessment of Surgical Resection Margin of Colo-Rectal Liver Metastases.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Repeat Hepatectomy After Major Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- Surgical Strategy Based on Indocyanine Green Test for Chemotherapy-Associated Liver Injury and Long-Term Outcome in Colorectal Liver Metastases.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study is to evaluate the prognostic impact of the extent of submillimeter or zero surgical margin (SubMM) area among the patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).The influence of suboptimal margin width of <1 mm on long-term outcome is unclear.A total of 423 liver resections for CRLM were performed at Japanese Red Cross Medical Center between 2007 and 2015. Among them, we identified 235 patients who underwent curative initial liver resection and classified them into 2 groups: R0 (margin: ≥1 mm) and R1 (SubMM). The R1 group was further divided into 2 groups by the extent of SubMM area: small SubMM area (≤4 cm) and broad SubMM area (>4 cm).The median tumor number was 4 (range 1-97), 23% had solitary and 37% had 8 or more number of metastases. With a median follow-up period of 30 months, the overall 1-, 3-, 5-year survival for R0 (n = 72) versus R1 (n = 163) groups were 98.4% vs 87.5%, 75.5% versus 57.1%, and 50.1% versus 36.6%, respectively (P = 0.004). After propensity score analysis allowing for matching the tumor number (<8 vs 8 or more), tumor size, and serum carcinoembryonic antigen level, the DFS and OS were significantly higher in the small SubMM area group (P = 0.024, P = 0.049), respectively.Although wide margins >1 mm should be attempted whenever possible, reducing the extent of SubMM area (≤4 cm) can contribute to better long-term outcome when wide margin is not practicable.
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.