Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37181590›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2023

Evaluation of individualized para-tumor resection of cervical cancer patients based on three-dimensional reconstruction.

Lu Wang, Ping Liu, Hui Duan, Pengfei Li, Weili Li, Chunlin Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Lu Wang *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Ping Liu *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Hui DuanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Pengfei LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Weili LiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Chunlin ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To discuss the possibility of individualizing the para-tumor resection range (PRR) in cervical cancer patients based on three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction. Methods: We retrospectively included 374 cervical cancer patients who underwent abdominal radical hysterectomy. Preoperative computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data sets were collected to get 3D models. Postoperative specimens were measured to evaluate surgical scope. Oncological outcomes of patients with different depths of stromal invasion and PRR were compared. Results: A PRR of 32.35 mm was found to be the cut-off point. For the 171 patients with stromal invasion <1/2 depth, patients with a PRR over 32.35 mm had a lower risk of death and higher 5-year overall survival (OS) than that in the ≤32.35 mm group (HR = 0.110, 95% CI: 0.012-0.988, Conclusion: In patients with stromal invasion <1/2 depth, the PRR should reach 32.35 mm to get more survival benefit and in patients with stromal invasion ≥1/2 depth, the PRR should reach 32.35 mm at least to avoid worse prognosis. Cervical cancer patients with different depths of stromal invasion may receive tailoring resection of the cardinal ligament.

Indexed as

cervical cancerpara-tumor resectionstromal invasiontailoring surgerythree-dimensional reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID37181590
PMCPMC10174429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.