Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29691623›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgery2018

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Treatment for Benign Sporadic Insulinoma Comparison of Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes.

Giulio Belfiori, Dominik Wiese, Stefano Partelli, Sabine Wächter, Elisabeth Maurer, Stefano Crippa, Massimo Falconi, Detlef K Bartsch

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Giulio BelfioriPancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. giulio_belfiori@live.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7334-2878
Dominik WieseDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Philipps University Marburg, 35041, Baldingerstrasse, Marburg, Germany.
Stefano PartelliPancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Sabine WächterDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Philipps University Marburg, 35041, Baldingerstrasse, Marburg, Germany.
Elisabeth MaurerDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Philipps University Marburg, 35041, Baldingerstrasse, Marburg, Germany.
Stefano CrippaPancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Massimo FalconiPancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Detlef K BartschDepartment of Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Philipps University Marburg, 35041, Baldingerstrasse, Marburg, Germany.
Philipps University of Marburg · DEVita-Salute San Raffaele University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBenign insulinoma is the most common functioning neuroendocrine tumor of the pancreas, and its incidence is estimated at 0.4%. The treatment of choice is organ-preserving resection. The aim of this study was to compare short-term and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive laparoscopic or robotic enucleation (MIC-EN) and open enucleation (O-EN) for sporadic benign insulinoma.

methodsA retrospective bi-institutional analysis of 71 patients who underwent an enucleation for sporadic benign insulinoma between 2003 and 2016 was performed. Patients were analyzed according to intention-to-treat principle.

resultsFifteen (21%) patients underwent MIC-EN (three robotic and 12 laparoscopic) and 56 (79%) patients O-EN. In all MIC-EN patients, the insulinoma was localized by preoperative imaging compared to only 62.5% (35 of 56) patients in the O-EN group (p = 0.005). Three of the MIC-EN patients (20%) with insulinomas in the pancreatic head had to undergo a conversion. Excluding conversions, MIC-EN procedures were shorter (145 vs 180, p = 0.036) compared to O-EN surgery. Late complications and pathological data did not differ between groups, excluding margin status R1 MIC-EN (26.7%) compared to O-EN (10.7%, p = 0.115). After a median follow-up of 75 (range 1-151) months, all patients were alive, but four (5.6%) patients (one after MIC-EN and three after O-EN) developed a functional recurrence. No patient with a R1 resection had a disease recurrence.

conclusionsMIC-EN for benign sporadic insulinoma is a safe procedure with at least similar short-term and long-term postoperative outcomes as the open technique. Thus, preoperatively localized benign insulinoma should be approached laparoscopically, if technically feasible.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildFemaleHumansInsulinomaLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPancreatectomyPancreatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID29691623
OpenAlexW2799336401

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.