Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27882511›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2017

Over 700 Whipples for Pancreaticobiliary Malignancies: Postoperative Morbidity Is an Additional Negative Prognostic Factor for Distal Bile Duct Cancer.

Stefano Andrianello, Giovanni Marchegiani, Giuseppe Malleo, Borislav Chavdarov Rusev, Aldo Scarpa, Deborah Bonamini, Laura Maggino, Claudio Bassi, Roberto Salvia

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Surgical management of biliary malignancy.Current problems in surgery · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

9 authors.

Stefano AndrianelloDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Giovanni MarchegianiDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Giuseppe MalleoDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Borislav Chavdarov RusevDepartment of Pathology, ARC-Net Research Center - University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Aldo ScarpaDepartment of Pathology, ARC-Net Research Center - University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Deborah BonaminiDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Laura MagginoDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Claudio BassiDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
Roberto SalviaDepartment of General and Pancreatic Surgery - The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. roberto.salvia@univr.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDistal cholangiocarcinomas and pancreatic cancers both arise from pancreaticobiliary epithelium. Despite their common origin, there is a possible discrepancy in outcome. We analysed the surgical, pathological and survival outcome of resected distal cholangiocarcinoma compared with pancreatic cancer.

methodsAll cases of resected distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic cancer from 1998 to 2014 were extracted from our database. Outcomes were compared.

resultsThere were 54 (7.6%) cases of cholangiocarcinoma and 656 (92.4%) pancreatic cancer. Cholangiocarcinoma showed lower T and N stage, lymphatic and perineural invasion (p < 0.05), worse surgical outcome (p < 0.05) and less access to adjuvant therapy if compared with pancreatic cancer (72.7 vs. 83.1%, p = 0.05). Both showed a similar disease-specific survival (35 vs. 29 months, p = 0.3). Independent predictors of prognosis for pancreatic cancer were resection margin, grading, perineural invasion, T and N status, whereas for cholangiocarcinoma were grading and occurrence of POPF.

conclusionConsidering a large cohort of resected periampullary cancers, cholangiocarcinoma is extremely rare. An earlier diagnosis is associated with better pathological predictors of outcome but increased postoperative morbidity compared to pancreatic cancer, particularly POPF. Consequent decrease in the access to adjuvant therapy for complicated cholangiocarcinoma might explain why survival is as poor as for pancreatic cancer.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBile Duct NeoplasmsBiliary Tract NeoplasmsCholangiocarcinomaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMorbidityPancreatic NeoplasmsPrognosisRetrospective StudiesAdjuvant therapyDistal cholangiocarcinomaOutcomesPancreas cancerPancreaticoduodenectomySurvival

Identifiers

PMID27882511

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.