Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32642260›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2020

Lobectomy versus sublobar resection in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.

Duilio Divisi, Andrea De Vico, Gino Zaccagna, Roberto Crisci

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Duilio DivisiThoracic Surgery Unit, University of L'Aquila, "G. Mazzini" Hospital of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Andrea De VicoThoracic Surgery Unit, University of L'Aquila, "G. Mazzini" Hospital of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Gino ZaccagnaThoracic Surgery Unit, University of L'Aquila, "G. Mazzini" Hospital of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
Roberto CrisciThoracic Surgery Unit, University of L'Aquila, "G. Mazzini" Hospital of Teramo, Teramo, Italy.
University of L'Aquila · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgery is the gold standard treatment of lung cancer. The minimally invasive technique does not only concern access to the chest but also the limits of parenchymal resection. The study debates on the safety and oncological adequacy of sublobar resections in bronchogenic carcinoma patients. A systematic analysis of the data in the literature was carried out, comparing the outcomes of patients with resectable non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. These last interventions include both segmentectomies and wedge resections taking into consideration the following parameters: complications, relapse rate and overall survival. The complication rate is higher in patients underwent lobectomy compared to sublobar resection, especially in presence of high comorbidity index or octogenarian patients (overall values respectively between 0 and 48% and 0 and 46.6%). Contrarily, the relapse rate (6.2% to 32%

Indexed as

Lung canceroutcomessurgical treatmentsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32642260
PMCPMC7330740
OpenAlexW3009090495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.