SynthesisUpdates in surgery2023
Laser-assisted lung metastasectomy: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Long-Term Follow-Up after Laser-Assisted Pulmonary Metastasectomy Shows Complete Lung Function Recovery.Cancers · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laser-assisted resection (LAR) of pulmonary metastases offers several potential advantages compared to conventional surgical techniques. However, the technical details, indications and outcomes of LAR have not been extensively reviewed. We conducted a systematic literature search to identify all original articles reporting on LAR of pulmonary metastases. All relevant outcomes, including morbidity rate, R0 rate, pulmonary function tests, overall- (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were collected. Additionally, a comparison between outcomes obtained by laser-assisted and conventional resection techniques was provided. Of 2629 articles found by the initial search, 12 were selected for the systematic review. Following LAR, the R0 rate ranged between 72 and 100% and the morbidity rate ranged from 0 to 27.5%. The postoperative decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s varied between 3.4 and 11%. Median OS and RFS were 42-77.6 months and 9-34.1 months, respectively. Compared with patients treated by other resection techniques, patients treated by LAR frequently had a higher number of metastases and a higher rate of bilateral disease. Despite this, no significant differences were observed in R0 rate, morbidity rate, and median OS rate, while only 1 study found a lower RFS rate in the LAR cohort. Although selection bias limits the comparability of outcomes, the findings of this review suggest that LAR is a valid alternative to conventional procedures of lung metastasectomy. The main difficulties of this technique consist in the adoption of a video-assisted thoracoscopic approach, and in the pathologic assessment of resection margins.
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.