ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2019
A propensity score matching study of non-grasping
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of tissue pneumoperitoneum technique around lymph nodes in thoracoscopic lung cancer resection.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- En Bloc Resection of a Primary Tumor and Lymph Nodes in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2024Article
- Early Integrated Palliative Care Within a Surgical Oncology Clinic.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Subcarinal lymph node dissection facilitated by applying suture passer in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Uniportal VATS for Diagnosis and Staging in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Perioperative comparison of video-assisted thoracic surgery and open lobectomy for pT1-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients in China: a multi-center propensity score-matched analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 2021Article
- Long-term outcome in mediastinal malignancies: video-assisted thoracoscopic versus open surgery.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2021Article
- Preoperative 3D-CT bronchography and angiography facilitates single-direction uniportal thoracoscopic anatomic lobectomy.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of our study was to compare the efficacy of lymph node (LN) dissection, short-term surgical outcomes, and long-term outcomes between non-grasping
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 872 patients with pathological stage I-III NSCLC who underwent VATS. The patient's demographic characteristics, short-term surgical outcomes, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed. A propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed between NE-MLND and G-MLND to reduce bias, and 349 pairs of patients were matched.
resultsBefore propensity-score matching, for short-term surgical outcomes, the NE-MLND group had shorter operation time (P<0.001), more LNs removed (N1: P=0.002; N2: P<0.001; N1+N2: P<0.001), more pleural drainage during the first 3 days after surgery (P<0.001), and longer postoperative hospital stay (P<0.001). For long-term survival outcomes, the NE-MLND group had a longer OS (5-year OS: 71.8%
conclusionsNE-MLND is a safe, acceptable and superior approach to remove mediastinal LNs with shorter operation time. Patients with NSCLC may benefit from NE-MLND, which could lead to better OS and DFS as compared with G-MLND.
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.