Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30826926›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2019

Central pancreatectomy for early-stage pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center case-control study.

Hao Gao, Tongtai Liu, Guangfu Wang, Yong Gao, Lingdi Yin, Yunpeng Peng, Nan Lyu, Kai Zhang, Wentao Gao, Junli Wu and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hao GaoPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Tongtai LiuPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Guangfu WangPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Yong GaoPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Lingdi YinPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Yunpeng PengPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Nan LyuPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Kai ZhangPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Wentao GaoPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Junli WuPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Kuirong JiangPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China.
Jishu WeiPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. weijishu@njmu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0529-272X
Yi MiaoPancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. miaoyi@njmu.edu.cn.
Jiangsu Province Hospital · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81672449National Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province BK20161590
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCentral pancreatectomy (CP) has been applied for treating benign and low-grade malignant tumors in pancreatic neck, but studies regarding CP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are quite limited. We aimed to investigate the role of central pancreatectomy in the treatment of PDAC in the neck of the pancreas.

methodsPatients who underwent CP at our hospital between 2009 and 2016 were identified. Patients treated by distal pancreatectomy (DP) were matched according to the tumor size, location, and staging. The surgical and survival outcomes were compared between the CP and DP groups.

resultsNine patients had CP. Five (56%) had postoperative complications and three (33%) had clinically significant (grade B + C) fistula. No significant difference was found between the CP and DP groups for the rate of overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, reoperation, and readmission. Tumor size was smaller in the CP group compared to the DP group. The mortality of both groups was zero. The median postoperative survival was similar between the two groups (20.4 months for CP vs 19.4 months for DP, P = 0.842).

conclusionsCP is safe for patients with small PDAC at the neck of the pancreas. Considering the good preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions, CP could be considered as an alternative procedure for single small PDAC in pancreatic neck.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersAgedCarcinoma, Pancreatic DuctalCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingOperative TimePancreatectomyPancreatic FistulaPancreatic NeoplasmsCentral pancreatectomyMorbidityPancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaPancreatic fistulaPostoperative survival

Identifiers

PMID30826926
OpenAlexW2918201399

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.