ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Survival after laparoscopy versus laparotomy for apparent early-stage uterine clear cell carcinoma: Results of a large multicenter cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive versus open surgery in uterine serous carcinoma: impact on recurrence and survival in a multicenter cohort.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Laparoscopy with or without robotic assistance does not negatively impact long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with uterine serous carcinoma.Gynecologic 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the long-term survival between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in patients with apparent early-stage uterine clear cell carcinoma (UCCC). Patients and methods: 254 patients with apparent early-stage UCCC were reviewed. Comparisons were made between patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery versus those who underwent open surgery. Baseline data, clinicopathological data, and oncological outcomes were analyzed. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate were estimated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Log-rank test. The Cox proportional hazard regression model was employed to control the confounding factors. Results: 147 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 107 patients were managed by open surgery. No differences in terms of recurrence rate (laparoscopy versus laparotomy: 10.9% versus 12.9%, Conclusion: For apparent early-stage UCCC, in terms of oncological survival, laparoscopic surgery was as safe as 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.