ArticleOncotarget2017
Clinical application and outcomes of sentinel node navigation surgery in patients with early gastric cancer.
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating No.3 lymph nodes and primary tumor radiomics to predict lymph node metastasis in T1-2 gastric cancer.BMC medical imaging · 2021Article
- Evaluation of postoperative quality of life by PGSAS-45 following local gastrectomy based on the sentinel lymph node concept in early gastric cancer.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2020Article
- Development of Magnetic Probe for Sentinel Lymph Node Detection in Laparoscopic Navigation for Gastric Cancer Patients.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Potential for local resection with sentinel node basin dissection for early gastric cancer based on the distribution of primary sites.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2019Article
- Novel surgical approach based on the sentinel node concept in patients with early gastric cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sentinel node navigation surgery (SNNS) has been recognized as a minimally invasive tool for individualized lymphadenectomy in patients with early gastric cancer (EGC). The aim of this study was to compare clinicopathological factors, adverse events, and clinical outcomes between sentinel node mapping (SNM) and SN dissection (SND) groups and assess the clinical utility of SNNS in patients with EGC. The clinical data of 157 patients with EGC, diagnosed as clinical T1N0M0 with tumors ≤ 40 mm, undergoing SNNS between March 2004 and April 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Twenty-seven patients were excluded from the analysis. In the remaining 130 patients, 59 and 71 patients underwent standard lymphadenectomy for SNM and SND, respectively. The sentinel node detection rate in the SNM and SND groups was 98.3% (58/59) and 100% (71/71), respectively. Two (3.5%), 15 (25.9%), and 41 (70.7%) patients having sentinel nodes underwent total gastrectomy, proximal gastrectomy (PG), and distal gastrectomy (DG), respectively, in the SNM group. One (1.4%), 5 (7.0%), 10 (14.1%), 39 (54.9%), and 16 (22.5%) patients underwent PG, DG, segmental gastrectomy, local resection, and endoscopic submucosal dissection, respectively, in the SND group. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the SNM and SND groups (
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.