Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30883699›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of surgery2019

Impact of resection margin status on recurrence and survival in pancreatic cancer surgery.

W S Tummers, J V Groen, B G Sibinga Mulder, A Farina-Sarasqueta, J Morreau, H Putter, C J van de Velde, A L Vahrmeijer, B A Bonsing, J S Mieog and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
107citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
12.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

107 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 219 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. FulminantAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: Portal vein-first vs artery-first approach.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Pancreatic cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

47 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

W S TummersDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1513-7037
J V GroenDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2438-4665
B G Sibinga MulderDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3978-7528
A Farina-SarasquetaDepartment of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
J MorreauDepartment of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
H PutterDepartment of Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
C J van de VeldeDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
A L VahrmeijerDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9370-0011
B A BonsingDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
J S MieogDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3649-8504
R J SwijnenburgDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Leiden University · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prognosis of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor and selection of patients for surgery is challenging. This study examined the impact of a positive resection margin (R1) on locoregional recurrence (LRR) and overall survival (OS); and also aimed to identified tumour characteristics and/or technical factors associated with a positive resection margin in patients with PDAC.

methodsPatients scheduled for pancreatic resection for PDAC between 2006 and 2016 were identified from an institutional database. The effect of resection margin status, patient characteristics and tumour characteristics on LRR, distant metastasis and OS was assessed.

resultsA total of 322 patients underwent pancreatectomy for PDAC. A positive resection (R1) margin was found in 129 patients (40·1 per cent); this was associated with decreased OS compared with that in patients with an R0 margin (median 15 (95 per cent c.i. 13 to 17) versus 22 months; P < 0·001). R1 status was associated with reduced time to LRR (median 16 versus 36 (not estimated, n.e.) months; P = 0·002). Disease recurrence patterns were similar in the R1 and R0 groups. Risk factors for early recurrence were tumour stage, positive lymph nodes (N1) and perineural invasion. Among 100 patients with N0 disease, R1 status was associated with shorter OS compared with R0 resection (median 17 (10 to 24) versus 45 (n.e.) months; P = 0·002), whereas R status was not related to OS in 222 patients with N1 disease (median 14 (12 to 16) versus 17 (15 to 19) months after R1 and R0 resection respectively; P = 0·068).

conclusionAlthough pancreatic resection with a positive margin was associated with poor survival and early recurrence, particularly in patients with N1 disease, disease recurrence patterns were similar between R1 and R0 groups.

Indexed as

Margins of ExcisionAgedFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPancreatectomyPancreatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID30883699
PMCPMC6617755
OpenAlexW2921197938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.