ArticleSpartan medical research journal2020
Clinicopathological and Perioperative Outcome of Appendiceal Tumors: Case Review of 31 Patients.
Article in Spartan medical research journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metastatic appendiceal mucinous adenocarcinoma presenting as bilateral ovarian masses mimicking advanced ovarian cancer: a case report.Ewha medical journal · 2026Article
- Article
- The Optimal Approach to Surgical Management of Goblet Cell Carcinoid of the Appendix: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Goblet Cell Adenocarcinoma of the Appendix: A Systematic Review and Incidence and Survival of 1,225 Cases From an English Cancer Registry.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNeoplasms of the appendix are quite rare and found in approximately 1% of appendectomy specimens. These neoplasms have been pathologically categorized into various subgroups depending on cell of origin, and surgical treatment varies according to histological subtype and disease stage. PURPOSE: The purpose of this case series review was to evaluate the clinicopathological presentation and survival outcome of a sample of patients with appendiceal tumors.
methodsBefore data collection, this project design was approved by the authors' institutional review board. Pathology records at our institution were reviewed for cases of appendiceal tumors from January 2007 to December 2016. A total of 31 patients were identified over this 10-year period. Retrospective data collection included patient demographics, presenting symptoms, tumor size, histologic diagnosis, initial and secondary management, perioperative and postoperative outcome, and survival benefits.
resultsThirty one patients with four different appendiceal tumor subtypes were included in the study: Mucinous Cystadenoma, Mucinous Adenocarcinoma, Goblet Cell, and Carcinoid. The sample was comprised of 17 women (54.8%) and 14 men (45.2%) with an overall mean age of 50.1 (SD = 22.3). Subgroups of 13 (42%) patients had Carcinoid tumor, 12 (39%) had Mucinous Cystadenoma, four (13%) had Goblet cell tumor, and two (6%) had Mucinous Adenocarcinoma. The stage at presentation and tumor size also varied by histologic subtype. The most common presenting symptom was abdominal pain (64.5%), followed by a radiological identified mass (12.9%). Overall, 27 (87.1%) patients survived, and four (12.9%) were deceased.
conclusionsThe findings from this case series review provides a retrospective analysis of appendiceal tumor characteristics, follow up, and survival. Based on these results, the prognosis and management of patients with these tumors should be based on the histologic subtype and the extent of their disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33655185PMC7746073What OpenQuestion holds
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.