Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28158453›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery2017

Systematic lymphadenectomy versus sampling of ipsilateral mediastinal lymph-nodes during lobectomy for non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review of randomized trials and a meta-analysis.

Sahar Mokhles, Fergus Macbeth, Tom Treasure, Riad N Younes, Robert C Rintoul, Francesca Fiorentino, Ad J J C Bogers, Johanna J M Takkenberg

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 49 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Survival After Mediastinal Node Dissection, Systematic Sampling, or Neither for Early Stage NSCLC.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Local Control by Mediastinal Lymph-Node Dissection in Stage I Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026
    Article
  6. PreoperativeTranslational lung cancer research · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sahar MokhlesDepartment of Cardio-thoracic surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Fergus MacbethWales Cancer Trials Unit, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Tom TreasureClinical Operational Research Unit, University College London, London, UK.
Riad N YounesHospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, Brazil.
Robert C RintoulDepartment of Thoracic Oncology, Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Francesca FiorentinoImperial College Trials Unit & Division of Surgery, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ad J J C BogersDepartment of Cardio-thoracic surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Johanna J M TakkenbergDepartment of Cardio-thoracic surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

British Heart Foundation CH/1992027/7163British Heart Foundation PG/13/9/29990
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo re-examine the evidence for recommendations for complete dissection versus sampling of ipsilateral mediastinal lymph nodes during lobectomy for cancer.

methodsWe searched for randomized trials of systematic mediastinal lymphadenectomy versus mediastinal sampling. We performed a textual analysis of the authors' own starting assumptions and conclusion. We analysed the trial designs and risk of bias. We extracted data on early mortality, perioperative complications, overall survival, local recurrence and distant recurrence for meta-analysis.

resultsWe found five randomized controlled trials recruiting 1980 patients spanning 1989-2007. The expressed starting position in 3/5 studies was a conviction that systematic dissection was effective. Long-term survival was better with lymphadenectomy compared with sampling (Hazard Ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.69-0.89) as was perioperative survival (Odds Ratio 0.59; 95% CI 0.25-1.36, non-significant). But there was an overall high risk of bias and a lack of intention to treat analysis. There were higher rates (non-significant) of perioperative complications including bleeding, chylothorax and recurrent nerve palsy with lymphadenectomy.

conclusionsThe high risk of bias in these trials makes the overall conclusion insecure. The finding of clinically important surgically related morbidities but lower perioperative mortality with lymphadenectomy seems inconsistent. The multiple variables in patients, cancers and available treatments suggest that large pragmatic multicentre trials, testing currently available strategies, are the best way to find out which are more effective. The number of patients affected with lung cancer makes trials feasible.

Indexed as

Lymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesNeoplasm StagingCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungHumansLung NeoplasmsMediastinumPneumonectomyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicLung cancerLymph node stagingSurgery

Identifiers

PMID28158453
PMCPMC6095012

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.