Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33144415›Full record

SynthesisIn vivo (Athens, Greece)

Systemic Review and Meta-analysis of Impact of Splenectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer.

Chikara Kunisaki, Sho Sato, Nobuhiro Tsuchiya, Jun Watanabe, Tsutomu Sato, Kazuhisa Takeda, Kohei Kasahara, Takashi Kosaka, Hirotoshi Akiyama, Itaru Endo and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chikara KunisakiDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan s0714@med.yokohama-cu.ac.jp.
Sho SatoDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Nobuhiro TsuchiyaDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Jun WatanabeDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Tsutomu SatoDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Kazuhisa TakedaDepartment of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Kohei KasaharaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Takashi KosakaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Hirotoshi AkiyamaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Itaru EndoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Toshihiro MisumiDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.
Yokohama City University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimProphylactic splenectomy has shown no inferiority for tumors not invading the greater curvature side. Despite this, the clinical impact of prophylactic splenectomy for proximal advanced gastric cancer is not clear. This review aimed to clarify the impact of splenectomy for advanced gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted based on PubMed and EMBASE databases. The following search terms were used: "gastric cancer" OR "splenectomy" OR upper third of the stomach" OR preservation of the spleen.

resultsOut of 765 articles, 18 studies (combined n=6,341) were included in the analysis. Four randomized controlled trials (RCT) and eight retrospective studies suggested the benefits of spleen-preserving gastrectomy. Six retrospective studies showed no significant benefit of spleen-preserving gastrectomy. Prophylactic splenectomy showed a close association with a higher incidence of postoperative morbidity (pancreatic fistula and anastomotic leakage) with no concomitant improvement in overall survival. Prophylactic splenectomy should not be routinely performed and RCTs are necessary to confirm the impact of splenectomy for cN(+) at the splenic hilum tumors and tumors invading the greater curvature.

Indexed as

Stomach NeoplasmsGastrectomyHumansLymph Node ExcisionRetrospective StudiesSpleenSplenectomyoverall survivalpostoperative complicationProximal gastric cancerreviewsplenectomy

Identifiers

PMID33144415
PMCPMC7811676
OpenAlexW3096643414

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.