Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34295547›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2021

Single-docking robotic-assisted artery-guided segmental splenic flexure colectomy for splenic flexure cancer-a propensity score-matching analysis.

Tao Zhang, Zijia Song, Yaqi Zhang, Xiaopin Ji, Xiaoqian Jing, Yi Shi, Xi Cheng, Ren Zhao

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tao ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zijia SongDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yaqi ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaopin JiDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xiaoqian JingDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yi ShiDepartment of General Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Xi ChengDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ren ZhaoDepartment of General Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ruijin Hospital · CNShanghai Ninth People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSplenic flexure cancer (SFC) is a rare condition in colorectal cancer (CRC). The appropriate surgical treatment for SFC remains controversial. In recent years, we have used artery-guided segmental splenic flexure colectomy (ASFC) to treat SFC in which robotic access is gradually applied. The study sought to assess the clinical and oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted ASFC compared to laparoscopic-assisted ASFC for SFC by undertaking a propensity score-matching analysis.

methodsSeventy patients underwent a robotic-assisted ASFC (n=19) or laparoscopic-assisted ASFC (n=51) to treat SFC from Dec 2015 to Dec 2019. Their data were prospectively collected. The patients were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to sex, age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (≤2 or >2), previous abdominal surgeries, and pathologic stage.

resultsNo statistically significant differences were found between the robotic- and laparoscopic-assisted ASFC groups in relation to operation time, estimated blood loss, length of postoperative hospital stay, time to liquid diet, postoperative complications, tumor size, distal resection margins, histology, lymph node harvest, metastatic lymph nodes, and neuro-vascular invasion. Additionally, no case was converted to a laparotomy. There were no cases readmission or mortality within 30 days of surgery. The distal resection margins were longer in the robotic-assisted ASFC group than the laparoscopic-assisted ASFC group. The robotic-assisted ASFC group had significantly higher operation expenses than the laparoscopic-assisted ASFC group. However, there was no significant difference in the surgical material expenses between the two groups. There were 2 cases of complications in each group; both cases were classified as grade I or II under Dindo's classification of surgical complications.

conclusionsWith the exception of operation expenses, robotic-assisted ASFC rivals laparoscopic-assisted ASFC in many respects. ASFC meets the recommended oncological criteria in terms of resection margins and lymph node harvest. We await the results for the long-term oncologic outcomes.

Indexed as

artery-guided segmental splenic flexure colectomylaparoscopic surgeryrobotic-assisted surgerySplenic flexure cancer (SFC)

Identifiers

PMID34295547
PMCPMC8261315
OpenAlexW3185871973

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.