ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2017
Clinical implication of surgical resection for recurrent biliary tract cancer: Does it work or not?
Review in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative approaches for patients with biliary tract cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Integrative genomic analyses of European intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Novel ROS1 fusion gene and PBX1 as prognostic marker.Clinical and translational medicine · 2024Article
- Current progress in perioperative chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Review
- Surgical treatment for recurrent cholangiocarcinoma: a single-center series.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors plus capecitabine and oxaliplatin in unresectable or advanced biliary tract cancer patients: A retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Linking Helicobacter pylori with gallbladder and biliary tract cancer in Moroccan population using clinical and pathological profiles.Bioinformation · 2019Article
- Clinical implication of surgical resection for recurrent biliary tract cancer: Does it work or not?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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although recent advances in imaging diagnosis, surgical techniques, and perioperative management can result in increased resectability and improved surgical outcomes, most resected patients still develop cancer recurrence. If patients develop cancer recurrence, their prognosis is very ominous. However, there have been some recent reports to show promising outcomes by aggressive surgical strategy in selected patients who developed cancer recurrence. Because there are various surgical procedures being selected at initial surgery in patients with biliary tract cancers, recurrent patterns after resection are very variable in each patient. However, surgical procedures might usually be very complicated and difficult if re-surgical resection is considered in patients with recurrent biliary tract cancer, Therefore, surgical re-resection could bring about high surgical morbidity and mortality rates in most previously reported series. Although re-surgical resection might offer a chance of favorable outcome in selected patients with biliary tract cancers, these aggressive surgical approaches should be carried out in strictly selected patients by expert surgeons at high-volume centers.
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.