Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34521366›Full record

SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2021

Efficiency of complete omentectomy in patients with resectable gastric cancer: a meta‑analysis and systematic review.

Akao Zhu, Guang Yin, Xinchun Liu, Wencheng Kong, Yu Zhang, Yuqiang Shan, Rongchao Ying, Jian Zhang, Chunhua Zhou

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Current debate in gastric cancer surgery: Omentectomy?World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
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.

Akao Zhu *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Guang Yin *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Xinchun Liu *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Wencheng KongDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Yu ZhangDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Yuqiang ShanDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Rongchao YingDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
Jian ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China. zjhz1994@sina.com.
Chunhua ZhouDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China. zch2676@163.com.

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province LQ20H160017Zhejiang Traditional Chinese Medicine Administration 2021ZA112
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of complete omentectomy (CO) in patients undergoing radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

methodsWe conducted a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases for clinical research that compared CO with non-complete omentectomy (NCO). These articles were published prior to April 2021. Overall survival (OS) rates, relapse-free survival (RFS) rates, recurrence rates, operation times, estimates of blood loss, numbers of harvested lymph nodes, complications, and lengths of hospital stays were compared using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs). RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis.

resultsNine studies that included 3329 patients (1960 in the CO group) and 1369 in the NCO group comprised the analysis. The meta-analysis showed that CO was associated with a decreased 3-year OS rate (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98, P = 0.005) and 5-year OS rate (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.98, P = 0.007). However, it was not associated with the 3-year RFS rate (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.90-1.04, P = 0.44), 5-year RFS (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.90-1.06, P = 0.60), or recurrence rate (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.95-1.45, P = 0.15) compared to the NCO group. For surgical-related outcomes, significant heterogeneity existed between the studies. Compared to the NCO group, CO was found to be associated with significantly more estimated blood loss (WMD = 250.90, 95% CI 105.90-396.28, P = 0.0007) and less harvested lymph nodes (WMD = - 3.59, 95% CI - 6.88, - 0.29, P = 0.03). Although, there was no significant difference in the surgical time (WMD = 15.93, 95% CI - 0.21, 32.07, P = 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the rates of overall (P = 0.79) and major complications (P = 0.90), or the lengths of hospital stays (P = 0.11) between the two groups.

conclusionsBased on the available evidence, CO is not superior to NCO in terms of survival. CO is not recommended as a routine surgery for gastric cancer. Future well-designed high-quality RCTs are warranted.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyStomach NeoplasmsGastrectomyHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeComplicationGastric cancerMeta-analysisOmentectomyOverall survival

Identifiers

PMID34521366
PMCPMC8439052

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.