ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery
A propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgical radical resection for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncologic outcomes and survival of modern surgical approaches for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST).Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Classification of GIST and other benign gastric tumors based on minimally invasive surgical strategy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST). However, the choice of surgical approach for gastric GIST remains controversial. Aims and Objectives: To evaluate the short- and long-term efficacies of laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery for gastric GIST. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 148 patients with gastric GIST at our hospital between January 2013 and January 2020. The patients were categorised into the following two groups based on the surgery performed: The laparoscopic surgery group (LG) and the open surgery group (OG). Differences in the tumour size, surgical procedures and modified National Institutes of Health classification were statistically significant. To balance the intergroup confounders, we performed 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Results: A total of 104 patients were selected after PSM (52 in each group). We focused on the short- and long- term outcomes of patients. The baseline information was balanced between the two groups after PSM. The LG benefited from the advantages of a minimally invasive surgery (faster gastrointestinal function recovery, shorter time to drainage tube removal, less blood loss and shorter hospitalisation period), however, it also had high treatment costs. Moreover, both laparoscopic and open surgeries resulted in similar intra-operative and post-operative complications rates, overall survival time and disease-free survival time. Conclusion: Laparoscopic resection is feasible and oncologically safe for GIST. However, more prospective studies are required to confirm the findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.