Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34658589›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of surgical oncology2021

Laparoscopic vs Open Gastrectomy: an Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials for Short-Term Outcomes.

Bhavin Vasavada, Hardik Patel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Bhavin VasavadaShalby Hospitals, Ahmedabad, India.ORCID 0000-0003-0502-6499
Hardik PatelShalby Hospitals, Ahmedabad, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database were searched for randomized control trials comparing outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomies with those patients undergoing open gastrectomies. The primary outcome was 30-day morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes studied included length of stay, blood loss, d2 gastrectomies, lymph node retrieval, operative time, wound complications, and intraabdominal complications. Systemic review and meta-analysis were done according to MOOSE and PRISMA guidelines. Eleven RCTs consisting of 4614 patients were included in the study. A total of 2452 patients were there in laparoscopic gastrectomy group while 2162 patients were included in open gastrectomy group. Morbidity was significantly low in laparoscopic group (

Indexed as

GastrectomiesGastric cancersMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID34658589
PMCPMC8490556

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.