ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2020
Robotic-Assisted Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Metastatic Melanoma Results in Durable Oncologic Outcomes.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of the Literature on Videoscopic and Robotic Inguinal-Iliac-Obturator Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Cutaneous Melanoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Preoperative and Intraoperative Identification of Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Melanoma Surgery.Cancers · 2024Article
- Robot-Assisted Pelvic Dissection for Enlarged Lymph Nodes in Melanoma Improves Recovery with Equivalent Oncological Outcomes to Open Pelvic Dissection.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Observational
- Artificial Intelligence in Dermatology Image Analysis: Current Developments and Future Trends.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Combined robotic inguinal and iliac-obturator lymphadenectomy for stage III skin cancers: Surgical technique and preliminary results.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRobotic pelvic lymphadenectomy (rPLND) has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective minimally invasive approach for patients with metastatic melanoma to the iliac nodes. However, the long-term oncologic benefit of this procedure remains poorly defined.
methodsA single-institutional study comparing perioperative outcomes and survival [recurrence-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS)] between rPLND and open PLND (oPLND) for metastatic melanoma was conducted.
resultsFrom 2006 to 2018, a total of 63 PLND cases were identified: 22 rPLND and 41 oPLND. Evidence of isolated pelvic metastasis was the most common indication for PLND in both groups (rPLND: 64%, oPLND: 85%). There was no difference in median pelvic lymph node yield (11 vs. 9 nodes, p = 0.65). Neither treatment group experienced a Clavien-Dindo complication ≥ 3. rPLND was associated with a shorter length of stay compared with oPLND (2 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001). With a median follow-up of 37 months, there was no difference in RFS (14.4 vs. 9.6 months, p = 0.47) and OS (43 vs. 50 months, p = 0.58) between rPLND and oPLND, respectively. In basin recurrence was low with 1 (4.5%) and 3 (7.3%) patients in the rPLND and oPLND cohorts, respectively, experiencing an event (p = 0.9).
conclusionsrPLND for metastatic melanoma is a safe, minimally invasive treatment strategy that appears to result in similar intermediate term recurrence and survival rates as oPLND but shorter hospital stays.
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.