Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35201463›Full record

ReviewDiscover oncology2021

Perforated gastric cancer: a critical appraisal.

Sara Di Carlo, Marzia Franceschilli, Piero Rossi, Giuseppe Cavallaro, Maurizio Cardi, Danilo Vinci, Simone Sibio

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Discover oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Surgical treatment of perforated gastric tumors.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Gastric perforation biopsy: is it obsolete?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024
    Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sara Di CarloDepartment of Surgery, Minimally Invasive Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6519-991X
Marzia FranceschilliDepartment of Surgery, Minimally Invasive Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2516-4621
Piero RossiDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Minimally Invasive Unit, Tor Vergata Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe CavallaroDepartment of Surgery Pietro Valdoni, Unit of Oncologic and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico 155, 00161, Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7121-2295
Maurizio CardiDepartment of Surgery Pietro Valdoni, Unit of Oncologic and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico 155, 00161, Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7462-8568
Danilo VinciDepartment of Surgery, Minimally Invasive Unit, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8215-5756
Simone SibioDepartment of Surgery Pietro Valdoni, Unit of Oncologic and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico 155, 00161, Rome, Italy. simone.sibio@uniroma1.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5694-951X
University of Rome Tor Vergata · ITPoliclinico Umberto I · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gastric cancer perforation is a life-threatening condition that accounts for less than 5% of all gastric cancer patients and typically requires emergency surgery. However, preoperative diagnosis is difficult and management has a dual purpose: to treat peritonitis and to achieve a curative resection. The optimal surgical strategy is still unclear and prognosis remains poor. A search of the literature was performed using MEDLINE databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane) using terms such as "perforated gastric cancer", "perforated gastric cancer and surgery", "perforated gastric tumour" and "gastric cancer perforated". Case reports, other reviews, non-english written papers and papers written before 2010 were excluded. Eight articles published between 2010 and 2020 matched the inclusion criteria for this review. Perforated gastric cancer was more prevalent in elderly males. Distal stomach was most frequently involved. Preoperative diagnosis was uncommon. Mortality rates ranged from 2 to 46%. Patients able to receive an R0 resection demonstrated better long-term survival compared with patients who had simple closure procedures. Laparoscopic procedure was mentioned only in one study. In an emergency situation, curative RO resection should always be offered in patients without multiple adverse factors. A surgical strategy using laparoscopic local repair as first step of surgery to resolve the peritonitis followed by a radical open or laparoscopic gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy could be considered. A balance between emergency and oncological needs should drive the surgical choice on a case by case basis.

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastric cancerPerforated gastric tumorPerforationPeritonitis

Identifiers

PMID35201463
PMCPMC8777488
OpenAlexW3165024842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.