ArticleTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2018
Clinical trends and effects on quality metrics for surgical gastroesophageal cancer care.
Article in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Margin Positivity in Resectable Esophageal Cancer: Are there Modifiable Risk Factors?Annals of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Gastrointestinal carcinoma and sarcoma surgery.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical therapy of mid-stage gastric cancer (GC) and other neoplastic conditions requiring gastric resection remains at the center of curative outcomes, while epidemiologic changes and multimodality treatment options have evolved rapidly. Putative quality metrics for gastrectomy such as R0 rate, total lymph node (LN) count or postoperative morbidity may depend partly on changing disease and treatment patterns, and deserve evaluation under various practice conditions.
methodsData within a U.S.-based single surgical oncologist's practice over 15 years were prospectively recorded and retrospectively analyzed for clinicopathologic factors, operative treatment aspects and outcomes. Trends and spectrum changes over three time intervals were analyzed with contingency analysis and continuous data comparative statistics.
resultsOf 179 patients undergoing gastric resection, 119 were male and 60 female, with a median age of 63 years (range, 24-98 years). Resections included 56 total, 56 subtotal/distal, 30 proximal and 37 segmental gastrectomies. Diagnoses included 96 GCs, 31 gastroesophageal (GE) junction (GEJ) cancers, 21 GI stromal tumors (GISTs), and 31 other conditions. Significant trends from first towards last time interval were observed for resection type (16% to 32% proximal, 9% to 30% segmental, P=0.0003), curative intent (76% to 98%, P=0.002), diagnosis (5% to 42% GEJ cancer, P<0.0001) and preoperative therapy use (0% to 58%, P<0.0001), among others. Intraoperative aspects showed significantly reduced blood loss (median: 500 to 150 mL) and transfusion requirements (39% to 4%), and an increased use of minimally invasive techniques over time (all at P<0.001). Among patients undergoing curative intent GC resection with LN dissection, total LN counts remained steady (mean: 26), while the number of involved LNs decreased (9.0 to 3.7, P=0.0003) and the R0 resection rate increased from 74% to 85% (P=0.05). The number of specimens with >15 LNs examined increased from 69.0% to 92.5% (P=0.022). At the same time, spleen preservation rate (91% overall) and major morbidity (16%) remained unchanged throughout. Postoperative length of stay decreased from a median of 12 to 8 days (P<0.0001).
conclusionsThis experience represents some variable practice patterns within a clinicopathologic spectrum of GE diseases. Postoperative or oncologic quality metrics have been sustained or did improve, which would support their utility for various practice settings; they compare favorably to other published U.S. experiences during the same time period.
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.