ArticleBMJ open2022
Open and minimally invasive surgery for gastrointestinal stromal tumours: a systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of full economic evaluations of robotic-assisted surgery in thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Application of a glasses-free 3D laparoscopic system in radical gastrointestinal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Clinicopathological characteristics and long-term prognosis of peritoneal and retroperitoneal gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Population-based long-term prognosis analysis of subcutaneous gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumours of the digestive system, and complete resection is the only way to provide a radical cure for resectable GISTs. Open surgery and minimally invasive approaches, including laparoscopy, robotic surgery and endoscopy, consist of the mainstream GIST resection. However, there is still a lack of evidence regarding which surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis would be better. Thus, we are planning to conduct a network meta-analysis and systematic review aiming to determine the comparative effectiveness among laparotomy, laparoscopy, endoscopy, robotic surgery, and laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery in GISTs. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science will be searched for published studies to identify the proper literature comparing open resection, laparoscopy, endoscopy, robotic surgery, and laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for resecting GISTs from inception to February 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies comparing at least two different interventions for GIST resection will be included. RCTs and non-randomised studies will be synthesised and analysed separately. Bayesian network meta-analysis will be performed to compare the surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis among the resection methods above. The included studies will be divided into several subgroups according to tumour location and size for further analysis. Sensitivity analysis will be performed to identify and explain heterogeneity to make our results robust. Meta-regression will serve as a supplementary method if data are available. The quality of evidence will be evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required for this network meta-analysis, as it is based on already published data. The findings of the review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021237892.
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.