SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2022
Prognostic Significance of Intraoperative Peritoneal Lavage Cytology in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Single-Center Experience and Systematic Review of the Literature.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Shorr Versus Modified Ultrafast Papanicolaou Method for Intraoperative Diagnosis of Peritoneal Washing Cytology in Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Phase II Study.Journal of gastric cancer · 2023Article
- Prognostic Value of Peritoneal Lavage Cytology in Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Stratified by Cytologic Status.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prognostic significance of peritoneal lavage cytology (PLC) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of PLC status in PDAC patients.
methodsPatients intending to undergo resection for PDAC between 2007 and 2020 were included. Survival was compared among patients who underwent resection with negative or positive PLC status and those who did not undergo resection. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to evaluate the prognostic impact of positive PLC status. A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate the correlation between prognosis and the positive PLC rate.
resultsA total of 480 patients formed the study cohort and were divided as follows: 438 in the negative PLC group, 18 in the positive PLC group, and 24 in the no resection group. Although the median survival time significantly differed between the negative and positive PLC groups (35.7 vs. 13.6 months, P < 0.001), it did not significantly differ between the positive PLC and no resection groups (13.6 vs. 12.2 months, P = 0.605). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that positive PLC status (hazard ratio = 3.54, 95% confidence interval = 1.97-6.38, P < 0.001) was the strongest poor prognostic factor. Based on statistical analyses for the systematic review, the prognostic impact of positive PLC status weakened significantly as the institutional positive PLC rate increased (P = 0.044).
conclusionsResection did not improve the prognosis of patients with positive PLC status in our cohort. The institutional positive PLC rate may be a good reference for surgical indication in these patients.
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.