Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29986713›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2018

A comparison of the operative outcomes of D1 and D2 gastrectomy performed at a single Western center with multiple surgeons: a retrospective analysis with propensity score matching.

Susanna Lam, Elinor Tan, Audrey Menezes, David Martin, James Gallagher, David Storey, Charbel Sandroussi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Comparative Effectiveness of Lymphadenectomy Strategies During Curative Resection for Gastric Adenocarcinoma.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Article
  14. Observational
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susanna LamThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia. susanna.s.lam@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2231-660X
Elinor TanThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Audrey MenezesThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia.
David MartinThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia.
James GallagherThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia.
David StoreyThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Charbel SandroussiThe Upper Gastrointestinal Unit, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, 50 Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been worldwide debate on lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer, with increasing consensus on performing an extended (D2) resection. There is a paucity of data in Australia. Our aim is to compare overall outcomes between a D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer in a single specialist unit.

methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis on patients who underwent a curative primary gastric resection for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 1996 and April 2016, primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to balance covariates between D1/D1+ and D2 groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves of D1/D1+ versus D2 were constructed and evaluated using the log-rank test with subgroup analyses for pathological node (pN) status. Multiple Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine predictors of overall survival.

resultsTwo hundred four patients underwent a gastrectomy, 54 had D1/D1+, and 150 had a D2 lymphadenectomy. After PSM, there were 39 patients in each group, the 10-year OS for D1/D1+ was 52.1 and 76.2% for D2 (p = 0.008), and 10-year DFS was 35% for D1 and 58.1% for D2 (p = 0.058). Subgroup analysis showed that node-negative (N0) patients had improved 5-year OS for D2 (90.9%), compared to D1/D1+ (76.4%) (p = 0.028). There was no difference in operative mortality between the groups (D1 vs D2: 2 vs 0%, p = 0.314), nor in post-operative complications (p = 0.227). Multiple Cox analysis showed advanced tumor stage (stages III and IV), and lymphadenectomy type (D1) and the presence of postoperative complications were independent predictors of poor overall survival.

conclusionsD2 lymphadenectomy with spleen and pancreas preservation can be performed safely on patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Significant improvement in overall survival is observed in patients with N0 disease who underwent D2 lymphadenectomy without increasing operative morbidity or mortality. This paper supports the notion of a global consensus for a D2 lymphadenectomy, particularly in the Western context.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaGastrectomyStomach NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHumansLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesSurgeonsD1 and D2 lymphadenectomyGastric adenocarcinomaGastric cancerLymphadenectomyLymph node dissection

Identifiers

PMID29986713
PMCPMC6038272
OpenAlexW2819860476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.