ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Operative approach and case volume are associated with negative resection margins for adrenocortical carcinoma.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microscopic positive surgical margins in robotic thyroidectomy: does robotic approach make a difference?Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic surgery for adrenocortical carcinoma: Estimating the risk of margin-positive resection.Journal of surgical oncology · 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
backgroundSurgical resection with negative margins is the treatment of choice for adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). This study was undertaken to determine factors associated with negative resection margins.
methodsNational Cancer Database was queried from 2010 to 2016 to identify patients with AJCC/ENSAT Stage I-III ACC who underwent adrenalectomy. Patient, tumor, facility, and operative characteristics were compared by margin status (positive-PM or negative-NM) and operative approach (open-OA, laparoscopic-LA, or robotic-RA). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with PM.
resultsEight hundred and eighty-one patients were identified, of which 18.4% had PM and 81.6% had NM. Patients with advanced pathologic T stage and pathologic N1 stage were more likely to have PM (vs. NM) (T3, 49.7% vs. 24.8%, p < 0.01; T4, 26.2% vs. 10.0%, p < 0.01; N1, 6.7% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.01). Patients undergoing OA (vs. LA and RA) were more likely to have advanced clinical T stage (T4, 16.6% vs. 5.7% vs. 7.8%, p < 0.01) and larger tumors (> 6 cm, 84.6% vs. 64.1% vs. 62.3%, p < 0.01). High-volume centers (≥ 5 cases) were more likely to utilize OA. Patients undergoing LA (vs. RA) were more likely to require conversion to open (20.3% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.011). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with higher odds of PM included T3 disease (OR 7.02, 95% CI 2.66-18.55), T4 disease (OR 10.22, 95% CI 3.66-28.53), and LA (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.28-3.09). High-volume centers were associated with lower odds of PM (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.98). There was no significant difference in margin status between OA and RA (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.71-2.90).
conclusionCenters with higher ACC case volumes have lower odds of PM and utilize OA more often. LA is associated with higher odds of PM, whereas RA is not. These factors should be considered when planning the operative approach for ACC.
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.