Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31246985›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Laparoscopic versus open right hemicolectomy in colon carcinoma: A propensity score analysis of the DGAV StuDoQ|ColonCancer registry.

Christian Jurowich, Sven Lichthardt, Caroline Kastner, Imme Haubitz, Andre Prock, Jörg Filser, Christoph-Thomas Germer, Armin Wiegering

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Christian JurowichDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery Kreiskliniken Altötting / Burghausen, Altötting, Germany.
Sven LichthardtDepartment of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.
Caroline KastnerDepartment of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.
Imme HaubitzDepartment of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.
Andre ProckDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery Kreiskliniken Altötting / Burghausen, Altötting, Germany.
Jörg FilserDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery Kreiskliniken Altötting / Burghausen, Altötting, Germany.
Christoph-Thomas GermerDepartment of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.
Armin WiegeringDepartment of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University Hospital, University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7777-0909
Universitätsklinikum Würzburg · DEMedias Klinikum · DEComprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken · DEUniversity of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether laparoscopy has any advantages over open resection for right-sided colon cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Right hemicolectomy can be performed using either a conventional open or a minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. It is not clear whether these different access routes differ with regard to short-term postoperative outcomes.

methodsPatients documented in the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|ColonCancer registry who underwent right hemicolectomy were analyzed regarding early postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo (primary endpoint), operation (OP) time, length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS), MTL30 and number of lymph nodes retrieved (secondary endpoints).

resultsA total of 4.997 patients were identified as undergoing oncological right hemicolectomy without additional interventions. Of these, 4.062 (81.3%) underwent open, 935 (18.7%) laparoscopic surgery. Propensity score analysis showed a significantly shorter LOS (OR: 0.55 CI 95%0.47-.64) and a significantly longer OP time (OR2.32 CI 1.98-2.71) for the laparoscopic route. Risk factors for postoperative complications, anastomotic insufficiency, ileus, reoperation and positive MTL30 were higher ASA status, higher age and increasing BMI. The surgical access route (open / lap) had no influence on these factors, but the laparoscopic group did have markedly fewer lymph nodes retrieved.

conclusionThe present registry-based analysis could detect no relevant advantages for the minimally invasive laparoscopic access route. Further oncological analyses are needed to clarify the extent to which the smaller lymph node harvest in the laparoscopic group is accompanied by a poorer oncological outcome.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overColectomyColonic NeoplasmsEndpoint DeterminationFemaleGermanyHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOperative Time

Identifiers

PMID31246985
PMCPMC6597089
OpenAlexW2953659489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.