Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30505973›Full record

ReviewTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2018

Incisions and reconstruction approaches for large sarcomas.

Leigh J Spera, Rachel M Danforth, Ivan Hadad

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Gastrointestinal carcinoma and sarcoma surgery.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2019
    Article
  8. Integrating therapies for surgical adult soft tissue sarcoma patients.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2018
    Review
  9. Abdominal Wall Extraskeletal Ewing's Sarcoma in an 8-Year-Old Child.Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric Surgeons
    Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Leigh J SperaDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Rachel M DanforthDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Ivan HadadDivision of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Indiana University School of MedicineIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large intraabdominal, retroperitoneal, and abdominal wall sarcomas provide unique challenges in treatment due to their variable histology, potential considerable size at the time of diagnosis, and the ability to invade into critical structures. Historically, some of these tumors were considered inoperable if surgical access was limited or the consequential defect was unable to be closed primarily as reconstructive options were limited. Over time, there has been a greater understanding of the abdominal wall anatomy and mechanics, which has resulted in the development of new techniques to allow for sound oncologic resections and viable, durable options for abdominal wall reconstruction. Currently, intra-operative positioning and employment of a variety of abdominal and posterior trunk incisions have made more intraabdominal and retroperitoneal tumors accessible. Primary involvement or direct invasion of tumor into the abdominal wall is no longer prohibitive as utilization of advanced hernia repair techniques along with the application of vascularized tissue transfer have been shown to have the ability to repair large area defects involving multiple quadrants of the abdominal wall. Both local and distant free tissue transfer may be incorporated, depending on the size and location of the area needing reconstruction and what residual structures are remaining surrounding the resection bed. There is an emphasis on selecting the techniques that will be associated with the least amount of morbidity yet will restore and provide the appropriate structure and function necessary for the trunk. This review article summarizes both initial surgical incisional planning for the oncologic resection and a variety of repair options for the abdominal wall spanning the reconstructive ladder.

Indexed as

abdominal wallabdominal wall reconstructionintra-abdominalretroperitonealSarcoma

Identifiers

PMID30505973
PMCPMC6232070
OpenAlexW2898897770

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.