ArticleTranslational cancer research2021
Significance of risk factor analysis and dissection for station 4L lymphatic metastasis in left lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- 4L lymph node dissection in non-small cell lung cancer: an updated systematic review and subgroup meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Article
- Surgical evaluation of station 4L in patients with lung cancer: the Ugly Duckling.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effect of 4L lymph node dissection on the prognosis of left lung cancer is currently controversial. Therefore, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the difference in prognosis between the dissection group and the non-dissection group, and assess the independent risk factors for 4L lymphatic metastasis.
methodsA systematic literature retrieval from PubMed, Embase and CNKI was conducted to identify relevant studies up to October, 5, 2020. The data concerning the overall survival (OS) rate, disease-free survival (DFS) rate, and risk factors for 4L lymphatic metastasis were extracted and analyzed.
resultsL10 lymphatic metastasis was an independent risk factor for positive L4 lymph node result (Z=4.89, P<0.05). The probability of positive L4 with positive L10 was 5.11 times of that with negative L10. L5 lymphatic metastasis was an independent risk factor for positive L4 lymph node result (Z=3.92, P<0.05). The probability of positive L4 with positive L5 was 3.92 times of that with negative L5. L7 lymphatic metastasis was not an independent risk factor for positive L4 lymph node result. Positive L4 lymph node decreased the survival rate of relevant patients while L4 lymph node dissection increased the survival rate of relevant patients (Z=2.81, P<0.05 or Z=4.18, P<0.05). Positive L4 lymph node reduced the DFS time of relevant patients while L4 lymph node dissection prolonged the DFS time of relevant patients (P<0.05, Z=2.72).
conclusionsIf the intraoperative pathological examination indicates positive station 10L lymph node, station 4L lymph node will be dissected, which may be a good choice at present. Positive L4 lymph node may reduce the survival time and DFS time of relevant patients while dissection of positive station 4L lymph node may prolong the survival time and DFS time of relevant patients. The intraoperative rapid frozen section pathological examination of station 10L lymph node may be a good choice.
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.