Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32756502›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020

Utility of Minimally Invasive Technology for Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection in Penile Cancer.

Reza Nabavizadeh, Benjamin Petrinec, Andrea Necchi, Igor Tsaur, Maarten Albersen, Viraj Master

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05388786 (Complications and Adverse Events in Lymphadenectomy in the Inguinal Area), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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.

NCT05388786 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Complications and Adverse Events in Lymphadenectomy in the Inguinal Area: Delphi Consensus on Adverse Events Definition and Management

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Southern CaliforniaRan2023 to 2024Enrolled200ConditionsConsensus DevelopmentArmsDelphi Questionnaire
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Reza NabavizadehDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2230-821X
Benjamin PetrinecDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
Andrea NecchiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Igor TsaurDepartment of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Medicine Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany.
Maarten AlbersenDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Viraj MasterDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
Emory University · USFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEKU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our aim is to review the benefits as well as techniques, surgical outcomes, and complications of minimally invasive inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND) for penile cancer. The PubMed, Wiley Online Library, and Science Direct databases were reviewed in March 2020 for relevant studies limited to those published in English and within 2000-2020. Thirty-one articles describing minimally invasive ILND were identified for review. ILND has an important role in both staging and treatment of penile cancer. Minimally invasive technologies have been utilized to perform ILND in penile cancer patients with non-palpable inguinal lymph nodes and intermediate to high-risk primary tumors or patients with unilateral palpable non-fixed inguinal lymph nodes measuring less than 4 cm, including videoscopic endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) and robotic videoscopic endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (RVEIL). Current data suggest that VEIL and RVEIL are feasible and safe with minimal intra-operative complications. Perhaps the strongest appeal for the use of minimally-invasive approaches is their faster post-operative recovery and less post-operative complications. As a result, patients can tolerate this procedure better and surgeons can offer surgery to patients who otherwise would not be a candidate or personally willing to undergo surgery. When compared to open technique, VEIL and RVEIL have similar dissected nodal count, a surrogate metric for oncological adequacy, and a none-inferior inguinal recurrence rate. Larger randomized studies are encouraged to investigate long-term outcome and survival rates using these minimally-invasive techniques for ILND.

Indexed as

endoscopicinguinal lymphadenectomyinguinal lymph nodesminimally invasivepenile cancerroboticvideo-assisted

Identifiers

PMID32756502
PMCPMC7465352
OpenAlexW3047174822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.