Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34988643›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Laparoscopic vs open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of surgical margin status and survival.

Miguel Nicolás, Matías Czerwonko, Victoria Ardiles, Rodrigo Sánchez Claria, Oscar Mazza, Eduardo de Santibañes, Juan Pekolj, Martín de Santibañes

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  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 1 institution in 1 country.

Miguel NicolásDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Matías CzerwonkoDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Victoria ArdilesDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Rodrigo Sánchez ClariaDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Oscar MazzaDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Eduardo de SantibañesDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Juan PekoljDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Martín de SantibañesDepartment of General Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Juan D. Perón 4190, C1181ACH, Buenos Aires, Argentina. martin.desantibanes@hospitalitaliano.org.ar.
Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires · AR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiver resection represents the curative treatment of choice for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Laparoscopic hepatectomy in CRLM is considered a safe approach. However, the information on their oncological results in the different series is deficient. This study aimed to compare the surgical margin, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with oncological resections of CRLM according to the type of surgical approach performed.

methodsBetween April 2007 and June 2017, 263 patients with CRLM underwent hepatic resection. Inclusion criteria were initial resectability, tumor size ≤ 50 mm, 3 or less metastases, no bilobar involvement, and absence of extrahepatic disease. A propensity score was performed to adjust the indication bias.

resultsEighty-two patients were included (56 open and 26 laparoscopic). Twenty-eight (50%) patients had synchronous presentation in the open approach and 6 (23%) in the laparoscopic approach (p = 0.021), with more frequent simultaneous open resections (p = 0.037). The resection margin was positive (R1) in 5 patients with an open approach and 2 with a laparoscopic approach (8.9% and 7.6% respectively; p = 0.852). Nine patients (16%) with conventional approach and 2 (7.7%) with laparoscopic approach had local complications (p = 0.3). There was one death in the open group and none in the laparoscopic. There were no significant differences in OS and DFS rate between both groups (1-3 years, OS: 92-77% and 96-75% respectively; 1-3 years, DFS: 63-20% and 73-36% respectively).

conclusionsThere were no significant differences in terms of surgical margin, OS rate, and DFS rate between the laparoscopic and open approach in patients with CRLM.

Indexed as

Colonic NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsRectal NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalHepatectomyHumansMargins of ExcisionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeColorectal cancerLaparoscopyLiver metastasesSurgical margin

Identifiers

PMID34988643
OpenAlexW4205229856

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.