ArticleCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie
Yield of routine staging laparoscopy in patients with gastric cancer in Alberta, Canada.
Article in Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective Canadian gastroesophageal cancer database: What have we learned?Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgieArticle
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
backgroundDespite guidelines recommending diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with gastric cancer, implementation is low. We aimed to explore trends in the use of laparoscopy for staging of gastric cancer in Alberta, Canada, determine the rate of positive findings and identify factors predictive of positive staging laparoscopy (SL) findings in this patient population.
methodsIn August 2018, we sent a survey to all general surgeons in Alberta who were members of the Alberta Association of General Surgeons to identify those treating gastric cancer. The survey inquired about type of practice (academic or community), gastric cancer case volume, routine versus selective use of SL and, if selective use of SL, criteria used to select cases. Participants were also asked to provide data from their SL cases from July 2007 to February 2019. We double-checked surgeon records with chart review. The primary outcome was evidence of metastatic disease on SL or cytologic examination or both. We performed logistic regression analysis to identify factors predictive of positive laparoscopy findings.
resultsThe survey was completed by 41 of 127 surgeons (response rate 32.3%). We reviewed 116 cases from 5 surgeons at 4 centres. Gross metastatic disease or positive findings on cytologic examination or both were identified in 37 patients (31.9%). On univariate analysis, the following were associated with an increased risk of identification of metastatic disease at laparoscopy: visualization of the primary tumour on computed tomography (CT) (odds ratio [OR] 9.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-76.5), presence of abdominal lymphadenopathy greater than 1 cm (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.4) and presence of ascites (OR 19.1, 95% CI 2.2-161.8). Visualization of the primary tumour on CT (OR 8.4, 95% CI 1.0-68.3) and the presence of ascites (OR 15.9, 95% CI 1.8-137.0) remained statistically significant predictors on multivariate analysis.
conclusionMetastatic disease was identified at SL in almost one-third of cases, which suggests that SL should still be used routinely in gastric cancer staging in Canadian centres. Our study identified several preoperative imaging findings associated with evidence of metastatic disease on laparoscopy; however, further studies are needed to establish robust predictors of positive findings before advocating for a selective SL approach.
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.