ArticleTranslational cancer research2022
Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Reduced Port Gastrectomy and Multiport Gastrectomy in Korea: Ad Hoc Analysis and Nationwide Survey on Gastric Cancer 2019.Journal of gastric cancer · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of conventional laparoscopic surgery and single-incision laparoscopic surgery in gastric cancer treatment: Outcomes and prognosis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Current Issues in Reduced-Port Gastrectomy: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of gastric cancer · 2024Review
- Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience.BMC 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The technical safety and efficacy of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS+1) for distal gastric cancer remain unclear. This study was performed to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with distal gastric cancer undergoing SILS+1 versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). Methods: This randomized controlled trial involved patients with clinical stage cT1b-3N0-2M0 distal gastric cancer. The patients were randomized to the CLS group or SILS+1 group. The surgical and pathologic outcomes, postoperative mortality, and pain intensity were compared between the two groups. Results: From January 2019 to April 2021, 117 patients were enrolled and assigned to either the CLS group (n=59) or SILS+1 group (n=58). The clinical characteristics, including blood loss, tumor diameter, pathologic stage, number of lymph nodes harvested, and postoperative recovery, were similar between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the overall postoperative complication rates between the CLS group and SILS+1 group (10.2% Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that SILS+1 for distal gastric cancer performed by an experienced surgeon might be a feasible and safe technique with better cosmetic results and less pain in strictly selected patients. Trial Registration: This trial was registered at www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100051491).
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.