Observational studySurgical endoscopy2022
Short-term outcomes of D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. 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.
- Re-evaluation of lymph node dissection and surgical strategy for locally advanced gastric cancer in the era of neoadjuvant immunotherapy: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Mesenteric-guided approach to pyloric lymphadenectomy in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Correlation between laparoscopic radical resection and tumor markers in peritoneal irrigation fluid.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- The short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastrium excision for lymph node-negative gastric cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Review
- Surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (D3 + CME) for colon cancer: A prospective single-center cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Diagnosis and treatment of postoperative bleeding in patients after gastrectomy: a retrospective case series study.Journal of gastrointestinal 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur previous study has demonstrated the surgical advantages of D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision (D2 + CME) in gastric cancer surgery. To further verify the safety of D2 + CME procedure, we conducted this large-scale, observational cohort study and applied propensity score matching (PSM) approach to compare D2 + CME with conventional D2 in terms of short-term outcomes in gastric cancer patients.
methodsData on 855 patients from Tongji Hospital who underwent laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with R0 resection (496 in the conventional D2 cohort and 359 in the D2 + CME cohort) between Dec 12, 2013 and Dec 28, 2017 were retrieved from prospectively maintained clinical database. After PSM analysis at a 1:1 ratio, each cohort included 219-matched patients. Short-term outcomes, including surgical results, morbidity, and mortality within 30 days after the operation, were collected and analyzed.
resultsIn this large-scale, observational cohort study based on PSM analysis, the D2 + CME procedure showed less intra-laparoscopic blood loss, more lymph node harvest, and faster postoperative flatus than the conventional D2 procedure. However, both the overall and severe postoperative adverse events (Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ III a) seemed comparable between two cohorts.
conclusionThe present study showed that D2 + CME was associated with better short-term outcomes than conventional D2 dissection for patients with resectable gastric 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.