ArticleClinical sarcoma research2018
Different quality of treatment in retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) according to hospital-case volume and surgeon-case volume: a retrospective regional analysis in Italy.
Article in Clinical sarcoma research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Multiple surgical interventions improve survival in locally recurrent retroperitoneal sarcoma: a retrospective cohort analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Financial burden of surgical treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma.Surgery today · 2024Article
- Centralized and Interdisciplinary Therapy Management in the Treatment of Sarcomas.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: a Current Review on Management.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2022Review
- Preoperative Biopsy in Patients with Retroperitoneal Sarcoma: Usage and Outcomes in a National Cohort.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: Prognostic Factors and Outcomes of a Series of Patients Treated at a Single Institution.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Minimally Invasive Versus Open Primary Resection for Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A Propensity-Matched Study From the National Cancer Database.Annals of surgical oncology · 2018Article
- T4 retroperitoneal liposarcoma. Challenges of big size sarcomas surgical treatment.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
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
backgroundRetroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) should be surgically managed in specialized sarcoma centers. However, it is not clearly demonstrated if clinical outcome is more influenced by Center Case Volume (CCV) or by Surgeon Case Volume (SCV). The aim of this study is to retrospectively explore the relationship between CCV and SCV and the quality of surgery in a wide region of Northern Italy.
methodsWe retrospectively collected data about patients M0 surgically treated for RPSs in 22 different hospitals from 2006 to 2011, dividing them in two hospital groups according to sarcoma clinical activity volume (HCV, high case volume or LCV, low case volume hospitals). The HCV group (> 100 sarcomas observed per year) included a Comprehensive Cancer Center (HVCCC) with a high sarcoma SCV (> 20 cases/year), and a Tertiary Academic Hospital (HVTCA) with multiple surgeon teams and a low sarcoma SCV (≤ 5 cases/year for each involved surgeon). All other hospitals were included in the LCV group (< 100 sarcomas observed per year).
resultsData regarding 138 patients were collected. Patients coming from LCV hospitals (66) were excluded from the analysis as prognostic data were frequently not available. Among the 72 remaining cases of HCV hospitals 60% of cases had R0/R1 margins, with a more favorable distribution of R0/R1 versus R2 in HVCCC compared to HVTCA.
conclusionsIn HCV hospitals, sarcoma SCV may significantly influence RPS treatment quality. In low-volume centers surgical reports can often miss important prognostic issues and surgical quality is generally poor.
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.