Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32394166›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

Short- and long-term survival after laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: a National database study.

Sahil Gambhir, Colette S Inaba, Matthew Whealon, Sarath Sujatha-Bhaskar, Marija Pejcinovska, Ninh T Nguyen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Comparative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy and Open Gastrectomy for Scirrhous Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

6 authors.

Sahil GambhirDepartment of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 333 City Blvd West, Suite 1600, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
Colette S InabaDepartment of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 333 City Blvd West, Suite 1600, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
Matthew WhealonDepartment of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 333 City Blvd West, Suite 1600, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
Sarath Sujatha-BhaskarDepartment of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 333 City Blvd West, Suite 1600, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
Marija PejcinovskaCenter for Statistical Consulting, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, 92697, USA.
Ninh T NguyenDepartment of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 333 City Blvd West, Suite 1600, Orange, CA, 92868, USA. ninhn@uci.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3745-966X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer remains controversial. Our objective was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) vs. open total gastrectomy (OTG) for gastric adenocarcinoma using a national cancer database.

methodsThe National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was analyzed for total gastrectomy cases performed for gastric adenocarcinoma. Patient demographics and surgical outcomes were stratified by stage and compared based on laparoscopic vs. open surgical approach. Primary outcome measures included 30-day and 90-day mortality and Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate long-term survival.

resultsThere were 2584 cases analyzed, including 592 (22.9%) stage I, 710 (27.5%) stage II, and 1282 (49.6%) stage III cases. The distribution of LTG vs. OTG cases was 156 (26.4%) vs. 436 (73.6%) for stage I, 163 (23.0%) vs. 547 (77.0%) for stage II, and 241 (18.8%) vs. 1041 (81.2%) for stage III. For all stages analyzed, there was no difference between laparoscopic vs. open approach for adjusted 30-day mortality (stage I: adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.52, p = 0.75; stage II: AOR 1.36, p > 0.99; stage III: AOR 0.46, p = 0.29) or 90-day mortality (stage I: AOR 0.46, p = 0.99; stage II: AOR 1.17, p = 0.99; stage III: 0.57, p = 0.29). There was no difference between LTG vs. OTG 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves for any stage (stage I: p = 0.20; stage II: p = 0.83; stage III: p = 0.46). When compared to OTG, LTG had a similar hazard ratio (HR) for mortality (HR 0.89 p = 0.20).

conclusionsLaparoscopic total gastrectomy and OTG have comparable 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and long-term survival.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualGastrectomyLaparoscopyAdenocarcinomaAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOdds RatioStomach NeoplasmsSurvival AnalysisTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeGastric cancerLaparoscopicOpenTotal gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID32394166

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.