Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29675778›Full record

SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2018

Systematic review of the mesopancreas: concept and clinical implications.

J M Ramia, R De-la-Plaza, A Manuel-Vazquez, A Lopez-Marcano, R Morales

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Mesopancreas-new unknown land or a mirage?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021
    Article
  9. What do surgeons need to know about the mesopancreas.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2020
    Review
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

5 authors.

J M RamiaDepartment of Surgery, Guadalajara University Hospital, University of Alcala, Guadalajara, Spain. jose_ramia@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1186-953X
R De-la-PlazaDepartment of Surgery, Guadalajara University Hospital, University of Alcala, Guadalajara, Spain.
A Manuel-VazquezDepartment of Surgery, Guadalajara University Hospital, University of Alcala, Guadalajara, Spain.
A Lopez-MarcanoDepartment of Surgery, Guadalajara University Hospital, University of Alcala, Guadalajara, Spain.
R MoralesDepartment of Surgery, Hospital Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2007, Gockel et al. coined the term mesopancreas (MP). In the next 10 years, a limited number of publications about MP have been published, but little is known about the oncological benefit of MP resection. We performed a systematic review of the literature on MP.

methodsAn electronic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Latindex, Scielo, and Koreamed databases until 15 June 2017 to identify all published articles dealing with the subject of MP. Some language restriction was done (Chinese and Rumanian).

resultsThe search yielded 51 articles; 28 articles were selected as relevant. All were retrospective studies focused more on describing technical variants, feasibility and safety than on the cancer results. The R0 rate in patients with MP resection ranged between 57 and 96.7%. In all the articles with a control group, the R0 rate was higher in the MP excision group. Survival data were explicitly stated only in five series.

conclusionMP is a difficult-to-excise retropancreatic area. In theory, it is agreed that MP excision raises the rate of R0 resections, which in turn reflected in an improvement in the oncological results; however, at present there are no randomized studies to prove this. Achieving a worldwide consensus on its concept, landmarks, excision technique and oncological results is essential.

Indexed as

PancreasHumansPancreatic NeoplasmsPancreaticoduodenectomyRetrospective StudiesTerminology as TopicMesopancreasMeso-pancreatoduodenumPancreasReviewSurgery

Identifiers

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.