Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37386310›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023

Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Surgery for the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer with a High Risk of Recurrence: A Propensity Score Matching Study in Korea and Taiwan.

Chi-Son Chang, Yen-Ling Lai, Chel Hun Choi, Tae-Joong Kim, Jeong-Won Lee, Byoung-Gie Kim, Wen-Fang Cheng, Yu-Li Chen, Yoo-Young Lee

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chi-Son Chang *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Cancer Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Yen-Ling Lai *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsin-Chu, Taiwan.
Chel Hun ChoiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Cancer Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Tae-Joong KimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Cancer Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jeong-Won LeeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Cancer Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Byoung-Gie KimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Cancer Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Wen-Fang ChengDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yu-Li ChenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. uly1007@yahoo.com.tw.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9742-4752
Yoo-Young LeeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Cancer Center, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. yooyoung.lee@samsung.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5902-9877
Samsung Medical Center · KRNational Taiwan University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study compared oncologic outcomes between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery for the treatment of endometrial cancer with a high risk of recurrence.

methodsThis study included patients with endometrial cancer who underwent primary surgery at two tertiary centers in Korea and Taiwan. Low-grade advanced-stage endometrial cancer (endometrioid grade 1 or 2) or endometrial cancer with aggressive histology (endometrioid grade 3 or non-endometrioid) at any stage was considered to have a high risk of recurrence. We conducted 1:1 propensity score matching between the MIS and open surgery groups to adjust for the baseline characteristics.

resultsOf the total of 582 patients, 284 patients were included in analysis after matching. Compared with open surgery, MIS did not show a difference in disease-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.77, P = 0.717] or overall survival (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.36-1.24, P = 0.198). In the multivariate analysis, non-endometrioid histology, tumor size, tumor cytology, depth of invasion, and lymphovascular space invasion were risk factors for recurrence. There was no association between the surgical approach and either recurrence or mortality in the subgroup analysis according to stage and histology.

conclusionsMIS did not compromise survival outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer with a high risk of recurrence when compared with open surgery.

Indexed as

Endometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeoplasm StagingPropensity ScoreRepublic of KoreaRetrospective StudiesTaiwanEndometrial cancerLaparotomyMinimally invasive surgeryRecurrenceSurvival

Identifiers

PMID37386310
OpenAlexW4382516684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.