ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2018
The influence of surgeon volume on outcomes after pelvic exenteration for a gynecologic cancer.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2018. 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.
- Historical Evolution of Pelvic Exenteration Surgery in Gynecologic Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Brunschwig's Era versus Contemporary Practice.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Advances in the Surgical Management of Cervical Cancer.Cancers · 2026Review
- Review
- Predictive factors of surgical complications after pelvic exenteration for gynecological malignancies: a large single-institution experience.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2024Article
- Long-Term Survival, Prognostic Factors, and Quality of Life of Patients Undergoing Pelvic Exenteration for Cervical Cancer.Cancers · 2022Article
- Analysis of long-term outcomes in 44 patients following pelvic exenteration due to cervical cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Hospital surgical volume and perioperative mortality of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies.Journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Performance and outcome of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: A population-based study.Gynecologic oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the effect of surgeon experience on intraoperative, postoperative and long-term outcomes among patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for gynecologic cancer.
methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of all women who underwent exenteration for a gynecologic malignancy at MD Anderson Cancer Center, between January 1993 and June 2013. A logistic regression was used to model the relationship between surgeon experience (measured as the number of exenteration cases performed by the surgeon prior to a given exenteration) and operative outcomes and postoperative complications. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model survival outcomes.
resultsA total of 167 exenterations were performed by 19 surgeons for cervix (78, 46.7%), vaginal (43, 25.8%), uterine (24, 14.4%), vulvar (14, 8.4%) and other cancer (8, 4.7%). The most common procedure was total pelvic exenteration (69.4%), incontinent urinary diversion (63.5%) and vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous reconstruction (42.5%). Surgical experience was associated with decreased estimated blood loss (p<0.001), intraoperative transfusion (p=0.009) and a shorter length of stay (p=0.03). No difference was noted in the postoperative complication rate (p=0.12-0.95). More surgeon experience was not associated with overall or disease specific survival: OS (hazard ratio [HR]=1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.97-1.06; p=0.46) and DSS (HR=1.01; 95% CI=0.97-1.04; p=0.66), respectively.
conclusionPatients undergoing exenteration by more experienced surgeons had improvement in intraoperative factors such as estimated blood loss, transfusion rates and length of stay. No difference was seen in postoperative complication rates, overall or disease specific survival.
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.