ArticleBMC cancer2016
Comparison of different methods of splenic hilar lymph node dissection for advanced upper- and/or middle-third gastric cancer.
Article in BMC cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative Outcomes of Spleen Preservation and Splenectomy in Total Gastrectomy for Proximal Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Splenic hilar lymph node dissection enhances survival in Bormann type 4 gastric cancer.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Ex Situ In Vivo Technique of Spleen-Preserving Splenic Hilar Lymph Node Dissection in Operable Proximal Gastric Adenocarcinoma.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Efficacy of the No. 10 lymphadenectomy with spleen preservation on patients with gastric cancer and/or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma who underwent total gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2022Article
- Risk Factors for the Severity of Complications in Minimally Invasive Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of gastric cancer · 2021Article
- Is splenic hilar lymph node dissection necessary for proximal gastric cancer surgery?Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2021Review
- The Retropancreatic Fusion Fascia Oriented Splenic Hilar Lymphadenectomy Versus Laparoscopic Approach In D2 Total Gastrectomy.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- Disadvantages of Complete No. 10 Lymph Node Dissection in Gastric Cancer and the Possibility of Spleen-Preserving Dissection: Review.Journal of gastric cancer · 2020Review
- Advantages of Splenic Hilar Lymph Node Dissection in Proximal Gastric Cancer Surgery.Journal of gastric cancer · 2020Review
- Laparoscopic splenic hilar lymph node dissection for advanced gastric cancer: to be or not to be.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
- Prognostic Impact of Extended Lymph Node Dissection versus Limited Lymph Node Dissection on pN0 Proximal Advanced Gastric Cancer: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Journal of gastric cancer · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgery for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) often includes dissection of splenic hilar lymph nodes (SHLNs). This study compared the safety and effectiveness of different approaches to SHLN dissection for upper- and/or middle-third AGC.
methodsWe retrospectively compared and analyzed clinicopathologic and follow-up data from a prospectively collected database at the Peking University Cancer Hospital. Patients were divided into three groups: in situ spleen-preserved, ex situ spleen-preserved and splenectomy.
resultsWe analyzed 217 patients with upper- and/or middle-third AGC who underwent R0 total or proximal gastrectomy with splenic hilar lymphadenectomy from January 2006 to December 2011, of whom 15.2 % (33/217) had metastatic SHLNs, and from whom 11.4 % (53/466) of the dissected SHLNs were metastatic. The number of harvested SHLNs per patient was higher in the ex situ group than in the in situ group (P = 0.017). Length of postoperative hospital stay was longer in the splenectomy group than in the in situ group (P = 0.002) or the ex situ group (P < 0.001). The splenectomy group also lost more blood volume (P = 0.007) and had a higher postoperative complication rate (P = 0.005) than the ex situ group. Kaplan-Meier (log rank test) analysis showed significant survival differences among the three groups (P = 0.018). Multivariate analysis showed operation duration (P = 0.043), blood loss volume (P = 0.046), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.005), and N stage (P < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for survival.
conclusionsThe ex situ procedure was more effective for SHLN dissection than the in situ procedure without sacrificing safety, whereas splenectomy was not more effective, and was less safe. The SHLN dissection method was not an independent risk factor for survival in this study.
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.