Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31240463›Full record

ArticleSurgery today2019

Indications for resection and perioperative outcomes of surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms in Germany: an analysis of the prospective DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas registry.

Ioannis Mintziras, Tobias Keck, Jens Werner, Stefan Fichtner-Feigl, Uwe Wittel, Norbert Senninger, Thorsten Vowinkel, Jörg Köninger, Matthias Anthuber, Bernd Geißler and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery today, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Ioannis MintzirasDepartment of Visceral-, Thoracic- and Vascular Surgery, Philipps-University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35043, Marburg, Germany. ioannis.mintziras@uk-gm.de.
Tobias KeckClinic for Surgery, University Clinic Schleswig-Holstein, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Jens WernerDepartment of General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplant Surgery, Klinikum Der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Stefan Fichtner-FeiglDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, University Clinic Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Uwe WittelDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, University Clinic Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Norbert SenningerDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, University Clinic Münster, Münster, Germany.
Thorsten VowinkelDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, University Clinic Münster, Münster, Germany.
Jörg KöningerDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic and Transplant Surgery, Katharinenhospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Matthias AnthuberDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Klinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Bernd GeißlerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Klinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Detlef Klaus BartschDepartment of Visceral-, Thoracic- and Vascular Surgery, Philipps-University Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35043, Marburg, Germany.
StuDoQ|Pancreas Study Group of the German Society for General, Visceral Surgery (DGAV)
Philipps University of Marburg · DEUniversity Medical Center Freiburg · DEUniversity Hospital Augsburg · DEKatharinenhospital · DELMU Klinikum · DEUniversity Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs) are rare, and their surgical management is complex. This study evaluated the current practice of pNEN surgery across Germany, including its adherence with guidelines and its perioperative outcomes.

methodsPatients who underwent surgery for pNENs (April 2013-June 2017) were retrieved from the prospective StuDoQ|Pancreas registry of the German Society of General and Visceral Surgery and retrospectively analyzed.

resultsA total of 287 patients (53.7% male) with a mean age of 59.2 ± 14.2 years old underwent pancreatic resection for pNENs. Tumors were localized in the pancreatic head (40.4%), body (23%), or tail (36.6%). A total of 239 (83.3%) patients underwent formal resection with lymphadenectomy, 40 (14%) parenchyma-sparing resection, and 8 (2.8%) only exploration. Fifty (17.4%) patients underwent a minimally invasive approach. Among the 245 patients with complete pathological information, 42 (17.1%) had distant metastases, 78 (31.8%) had stage I tumors, 74 (30.2%) stage II, and 51 (20.8%) stage III. A total of 112 (45.7%) patients had G1 tumors, 101 (41.2%) G2, and 24 (9.8%) G3. Nodal involvement on imaging was an independent predictor of lymph node metastasis according to the multivariable analysis (odds ratio: 0.057; 95% confidence interval: 0.016-0.209; p < 0.01). R0 resection was reported in 240 (83.6%) patients. The 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 2.8% and 4.2%, respectively.

conclusionIn Germany the rate of potential curative resection for pNEN is high. However, formal pancreatic resection seems to be overrepresented, while minimally invasive resection is underrepresented.

Indexed as

RegistriesAgedCarcinoma, NeuroendocrineFemaleGermanyHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeoplasm StagingPancreatectomyPancreatic NeoplasmsPractice Guidelines as TopicRetrospective StudiesComplicationPancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasmsStuDoQ|Pancreas registrySurgery

Identifiers

PMID31240463
OpenAlexW2955398072

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.