ArticleGynecology and minimally invasive therapy
The Impaction of Laparoscopic versus Laparotomy for Lymphovascular Space Invasion of Early Cervical Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.
Article in Gynecology and minimally invasive therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Options for Uterine Fibroids Using Microwave and Radiofrequency.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyReview
- From Radical Hysterectomy to Radical Surgery for Deep Endometriosis.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Hysterectomy through Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cervical High-grade Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Reassessment of the Specimens' Eligibility for Histological Examination.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- The Current Trend of Fertility Preservation in Patients with Cervical Cancer.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyReview
- Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- The Era of 4K Three-dimensional Imaging is Coming.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Comparison of Surgical and Oncological Outcomes between Laparoscopic and Open Surgeries in Patients with Stage IA1 Cervical Cancer.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Comparison of Prognosis between Abdominal and Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomies in Early-stage Cervical Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the lymphovascular space invasion between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) and abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH). Materials and Methods: One retrospective study was conducted with 391 patients treated with 242 patients underwent ARH and 149 patients underwent LRH between May 2010 and August 2019. We collected clinicopathological and perioperative outcome from medical records. We adopt Student's Results: Our research found that there was no difference in tumor size, histology, pathology grades, positive lymph nodes, and postoperative complications between LRH and ARH ( Conclusion: Compared to ARH, the LRH would be advantageous for early cervical cancer in terms of EBL, length of postoperative hospital stay, and intraoperative complications. The ARH was superior to LRH in operative time. In addition to, LRH was more likely to lead to LVSI. Furthermore, when tumor size or stage was increasing, LRH was easily to generate LVSI. But, we cannot confirm recurrence rate is related to LVSI.
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.