ArticleBMC surgery2022
A laparoscopic radical inguinal lymphadenectomy approach partly preserving great saphenous vein branches can benefit for patients with penile carcinoma.
Article in BMC surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical outcomes of inguinal lymph node dissection via the lower abdominal wall approach in patients with penile cancer and risk factors for postoperative lymphatic leakage.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Suprapubic antegrade endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy with great saphenous vein preservation for penile cancer: a stepwise technique (with video).World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Video-endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL) oncological and surgical benefits compared to open inguinal lymph node dissection (ILND).Journal of men's health · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic simultaneous anterograde inguinal and pelvic lymphadenectomy for penile cancer: two planses, three holes, and six steps.Frontiers in surgery · 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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInguinal lymphadenectomy (iLAD) is effective for penile carcinoma treatment, but usually results in many complications. This study aims to clinically evaluate the feasibility and clinical significance of a laparoscopic radical iLAD approach partly preserving great saphenous vein branches for penile carcinoma patients.
methodsA total of 48 patients with penile cancer who underwent laparoscopic radical iLAD with retention of the great saphenous vein in Henan Cancer Hospital from 2012 Jan to 2020 Dec were included in this study. Sixteen penile carcinoma patients who underwent laparoscopic radical iLAD preserving parts of superficial branches of the great saphenous vein were identified as the sparing group, and the matched 32 patients who incised those branches were identified as control group. This new procedure was performed by laparoscopy, preserving parts of superficial branches of the great saphenous vein, superficial lateral and medial femoral veins. Clinicopathological features and perioperative variables were recorded. Postoperative complications, including skin flap necrosis, lymphorrhagia, and lower extremity edema were analyzed retrospectively.
resultsWe found that the operative time of the sparing group is significantly longer than the control group (p = 0.011). There was no statistical difference in intraoperative blood loss, the lymph node number per side, average time to remove the drainage tube and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups. Compared to the control group, the sparing group showed a significantly decreased incidence of lower extremity edema (p = 0.018). The preservation of parts of superficial branches of the great saphenous vein was mainly decreased the incidence of edema below ankle (p = 0.034).
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that the iLAD with preserving parts of superficial branches of the great saphenous vein, with a decreased incidence of postoperative complications, is a safe and feasible approach for penile cancer.
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.