ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022
Laparoscopic vs. Open Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Case-Control Study.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparisons of perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: an updated pooled analysis of eighteen studies.European journal of medical research · 2023Pooled it
- Cost analysis of laparoscopic total versus open total gastrectomy in gastric cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Possible muscle-sparing advantage and bodyweight maintenance of laparoscopic gastrectomy for older patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Survival prognostic analysis of laparoscopic D2 radical resection for locally advanced gastric cancer: A multicenter cohort study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Short-term outcomes of distal gastrectomy versus total gastrectomy for gastric cancer under enhanced recovery after surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Retrograde drainage for duodenal stump leakage using ileal decompression tube guided by double-balloon endoscopy: a novel case report.Surgical case reports · 2024Article
- Review
- Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in elderly patients: a propensity-score matched analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- RESULTS OF MECHANIC VERSUS MOTORIZED STAPLER USED IN GASTRIC SURGERY: PROSPECTIVE STUDY.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Article
- Current Understanding of PCSK9 and Its Relevance to Cancer Prognosis and Immune Therapy: A Review.Iranian journal of pathology · 2024Review
- Current status of evaluation and treatment of early-stage remnant gastric cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
- Analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided bilateral transversus abdominis plane block in laparoscopic gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Article
- Open vs robotic gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis on 1469 patients from the IMIGASTRIC prospective database.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Open Versus Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for T4a Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries, the use of minimally invasive techniques has not attained the same widespread acceptance for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its feasibility and oncological adequacy. We aimed to examine the safety and oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic technique with radical intent for the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer by comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy at two Western regional institutions. Methods: The trial was designed as a retrospective comparative matched case-control study for postoperative pathological diagnoses of locally advanced gastric carcinoma. Between January 2015 and September 2021, 120 consecutive patients who underwent curative-intent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were retrospectively recruited and compared with 120 patients who received open gastrectomy. In order to obtain a comparison that was as homogeneous as possible, the equal control group of pairing (1:1) patients submitted to open gastrectomy who matched those of the laparoscopic group was statistically generated by using a propensity matched score method. The following potential confounder factors were aligned: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidity, ASA, adjuvant therapy, tumour location, type of gastrectomy, and pT stage. Patient demographics, operative findings, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: In the case-control study, the two groups were clearly comparable with respect to matched variables, as was expected given the intentional primary selective criteria. No statistically significant differences were revealed in overall complications (16.7% vs. 20.8%, p = 0.489), rate of reoperation (3.3% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.714), and mortality (4.2% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.987) within 30 days. Pulmonary infection and wound complications were observed more frequently in the OG group (0.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.01, for each of these two categories). Anastomotic and duodenal stump leakage occurred in 5.8% of the patients after laparoscopic gastrectomy and in 3.3% after open procedure (p = 0.072). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly longer operative time (212 vs. 192 min, p < 0.05) but shorter postoperative length of stay (9.1 vs. 11.6 days, p < 0.001). The mean number of resected lymph nodes after D2 dissection (31.4 vs. 33.3, p = 0.134) and clearance of surgical margins (97.5% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.432) were equivalent between the groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection appears to be safe and feasible in terms of perioperative morbidity for locally advanced gastric cancer, with comparable oncological equivalency with respect to traditional open surgery.
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.