SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2020
Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy in surgical efficacy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D versus 2D laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopy: What is the evidence?Veterinary surgery : VS · 2025Review
- A Monocular Variable Magnifications 3D Laparoscope System Using Double Liquid Lenses.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe surgical efficacy of three-dimensional (3D) and two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer remains controversial. A meta-analysis with all eligible studies was conducted to explore the surgical efficacy of 2D versus 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
methodsA systematic search was performed. The weighted mean difference (WMD) or odds risk (OR) of patients with 2D or 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy were used to calculate surgical efficacy of 3D and 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
resultsTen studies involving 1478 patients who underwent 2D or 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy were identified. Three-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy decreases operation time (WMD: - 16.517, 95% CI - 25.550 to - 7.484, P = 0.000), intraoperative blood loss (WMD: - 21.060, 95% CI - 32.209 to - 9.911, P = 0.000) and number of retrieved lymph nodes (WMD: 3.699, 95% CI 1.838-5.560, P = 0.000) compared with 2D laparoscopic surgery. However, no differences in time to first postoperative flatus (WMD: - 0.119, 95% CI - 0.330 to - 0.092, P = 0.269), perioperative complications (OR: 0.901, 95% CI 0.649-1.251, P = 0.534), or hospital stay (WMD: - 0.624, 95% CI - 1.983 to 0.735, P = 0.368) were noted between 3D and 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
conclusion3D laparoscopic gastrectomy decreases the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and numbers of retrieved lymph nodes compared with 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
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.