Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33515209›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2021

Salvage robotic anterior pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer: technique and feasibility.

Vandana Jain, Subrata Debnath, Sudhir Rawal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vandana JainDepartment of Uro-Gynae Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, Sector-V, Rohini, Delhi, 110085, India. dr.vandana.j@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2487-4039
Subrata DebnathDepartment of Uro-Gynae Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, Sector-V, Rohini, Delhi, 110085, India.
Sudhir RawalDepartment of Uro-Gynae Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, Sector-V, Rohini, Delhi, 110085, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3331-2372
Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of our study was to explain the technique and evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic anterior pelvic exenteration in cases of residual/recurrent cervical cancer as a salvage therapy. The study was conducted as a retrospective review of all the cases of central residual/recurrent cervical cancer who underwent anterior pelvic exenteration by robotic approach with curative intent at our centre between January 2013 and December 2019. Information regarding various treatment related parameters like duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, early and late complications and recurrence and survival was collected and evaluated. 14 patients underwent anterior pelvic exenteration by robotic approach in this period. The median age of patients at time of exenteration was 52.5 years. 13 out of 14 patients had received combined chemoradiation as a part of intial treatment. The median duration of surgery was 305 min with a median estimated blood loss of 135 ml and median length of hospital stay of 6.5 days. Early complications like urosepsis, uretero-ileal anastomotic leak and paralytic ileus occurred in 36% patients and late complications like ureteric stricture and bowel perforation occurred in 28.6% patients. Negative surgical margins could be achieved in all the patients. Over a median follow-up period of 17.5 months, five patients developed recurrence and five patients experienced mortality, with four out of five patients dying due to recurrent disease. The 12-month DFS was 68.2% and the 12-month OS was 77.1%. Robotic anterior pelvic exenteration is a safe and feasible option in selected patients with recurrent/residual cervical cancer as a salvage procedure, with acceptable morbidity and mortality.

Indexed as

Pelvic ExenterationRobotic Surgical ProceduresUterine Cervical NeoplasmsFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesSalvage TherapyCervical cancerComplicationsRecurrenceRobotic anterior pelvic exenteration

Identifiers

PMID33515209
OpenAlexW3124930125

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.