Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28726137›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Long- and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy in patients with clinically and pathological locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity-score matching analysis.

Mikito Inokuchi, Masatoshi Nakagawa, Toshiro Tanioka, Keisuke Okuno, Kentaro Gokita, Kazuyuki Kojima

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. LCP1 is a prognostic biomarker correlated with immune infiltrates in gastric cancer.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2021
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mikito InokuchiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan. m-inokuchi.srg2@tmd.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7321-848X
Masatoshi NakagawaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Toshiro TaniokaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Keisuke OkunoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Kentaro GokitaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Kazuyuki KojimaCenter of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Tokyo Medical and Dental University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic (laparoscopy-assisted) gastrectomy (LG) has several short-term benefits as compared with open distal gastrectomy (OG) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Survival rates did not differ significantly between LG and OG in retrospective studies of AGC, although some studies included unmatched groups of patients or patients with AGC who had a preoperative diagnosis of early gastric cancer. The aim of present study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of patients with AGC who underwent LG with those of patients with AGC who underwent OG using a propensity-score matching analysis.

methodsThe study group comprised patients with a preoperative and pathologically confirmed diagnosis of AGC who underwent LG or OG with lymphadenectomy between January 2001 and December 2012 in our hospital. To minimize bias between the LG and OG groups, propensity scores were calculated using a logistic regression model and the following variables: sex, age, body-mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class, type of gastrectomy, and clinical and pathological tumor stage. After propensity-score matching, 104 patients (52 who underwent LG and 52 who underwent OG) were studied.

resultsLG was associated with significantly earlier initiation of food intake (p <0.01) and a significantly shorter period of postoperative hospitalization (p <0.01). The incidence of all-grade overall, surgical, and medical complications did not differ significantly between the LG group and OG group (p = 0.24, p = 0.12, and p >0.99). Overall and relapse-free survival also did not differ between the LG group and OG group (p = 0.96, p = 0.91). In each tumor stage, overall and relapse-free survival did not differ significantly between the LG group and OG group.

conclusionLG can be a feasible treatment that is beneficial in terms of earlier recovery after operation and can be expected to result in similar survival as OG in patients with AGC.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesFemaleGastrectomyHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesStomach NeoplasmsAdvanced gastric cancerGastrectomyLaparoscopy

Identifiers

PMID28726137
OpenAlexW2736939050

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.