Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33759836›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of surgery2020

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial: No Clear Benefit to Prophylactic Central Neck Dissection in Patients With Clinically Node Negative Papillary Thyroid Cancer.

Rebecca S Sippel, Sarah E Robbins, Jennifer L Poehls, Susan C Pitt, Herbert Chen, Glen Leverson, Kristin L Long, David F Schneider, Nadine P Connor

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Landmark Studies in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca S SippelDivision of Endocrine Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Sarah E RobbinsDivision of Endocrine Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Jennifer L PoehlsDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Susan C PittDivision of Endocrine Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Herbert ChenDepartment of Surgery, University of Alabama- Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Glen LeversonDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Kristin L LongDivision of Endocrine Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
David F SchneiderDivision of Endocrine Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
Nadine P ConnorDivision of Otolaryngology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USStatisticon (Sweden) · SEUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Christian Capitini · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
Central Neck Dissection in Patients with Clinical Node Negative Thyroid CancerR01CA176911 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CONNOR, NADINE P, SIPPEL, REBECCA S · 2014 to 2019
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NCI NIH HHS R01 CA176911
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this prospective randomized-controlled trial was to evaluate the risks/benefits of prophylactic central neck dissection (pCND) in patients with clinically node negative (cN0) papillary thyroid cancer (PTC).

backgroundMicroscopic lymph node involvement in patients with PTC is common, but the optimal management is unclear.

methodsSixty patients with cN0 PTC were randomized to a total thyroidectomy (TT) or a TT+ pCND. All patients received postoperative laryngoscopies and standardized radioiodine treatment. Thyroglobulin (Tg) levels and/or neck ultrasounds were performed at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year.

resultsTumors averaged 2.2 ± 0.2 cm and 11.9% had extra-thyroidal extension. Thirty patients underwent a pCND and 27.6% had positive nodes (all ≤6 mm). Rates of postoperative PTH < 10 (33.3% vs 24.1%, P = 0.57) and transient nerve dysfunction (13.3% vs 10.3%, P = 1.00) were not significantly different between groups. Six weeks after surgery, both TT and TT + pCND were equally likely to achieve a Tg < 0.2 (54.5% vs 66.7%, P = 0.54) and/or a stimulated Tg (sTg) <1 (59.3% vs 64.0%, P = 0.78). At 1 year, rates of Tg < 0.2 (88.9% vs 90.0%, P = 1.00) and sTg < 1 (93.8% vs 92.3%, P = 1.00) remained similar between groups. Neck ultrasounds at 1 year were equally likely to be read as normal (85.7% in TT vs 85.1% in pCND, P = 1.00).

conclusionscN0 PTC patients treated either with TT or TT + pCND had similar complication rates after surgery. Although microscopic nodes were discovered in 27.6% of pCND patients, oncologic outcomes were comparable at 1 year.

Indexed as

Neck DissectionFemaleHumansLaryngoscopyLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesThyroid Cancer, PapillaryThyroidectomy

Identifiers

PMID33759836
PMCPMC8496479
OpenAlexW3049018018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.