Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33319160›Full record

ArticleAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2020

Clinical outcome of laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy for colon cancer: A propensity score matching analysis of the Japanese National Clinical Database.

Takeru Matsuda, Hideki Endo, Masafumi Inomata, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Hiraku Kumamaru, Hiroaki Miyata, Yoshiharu Sakai, Yoshihiro Kakeji, Yuko Kitagawa, Masahiko Watanabe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors.

Takeru MatsudaThe Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9541-856X
Hideki EndoDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0052-0332
Masafumi InomataThe Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery Tokyo Japan.
Hiroshi HasegawaDepartment of Surgery Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine Kobe Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1545-0509
Hiraku KumamaruDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan.
Hiroaki MiyataDepartment of Healthcare Quality Assessment Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan.
Yoshiharu SakaiThe Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery Tokyo Japan.
Yoshihiro KakejiDepartment of Surgery Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine Kobe Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2727-0241
Yuko KitagawaThe Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery Tokyo Japan.
Masahiko WatanabeThe Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery Tokyo Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe advantages of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy over open surgery for colon cancer in general clinical practice are debated, as evidenced by the continued use of open surgery in a significant proportion of patients worldwide. This study aimed to assess and compare the clinical outcome of laparoscopic and open right hemicolectomy for colon cancer using data from the Japanese National Clinical Database.

methodsA total of 72 299 patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 46 084) and open (n = 26 215) right hemicolectomy for colon cancer between 2014 and 2018 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Short-term outcome was compared between groups using propensity score matching analysis.

resultsThe incidence of overall postoperative morbidity ≥ Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3 was significantly higher in the open surgery group than the laparoscopic group (4.7% vs 3.2%,

conclusionLaparoscopic right hemicolectomy has an advantage over open surgery for colon cancer with respect to short-term outcome.

Indexed as

colon cancerlaparoscopic surgerynational databaseright hemicolectomyshort‐term outcome

Identifiers

PMID33319160
PMCPMC7726676

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.