ReviewAnnals of surgical oncology2023
Does a Positive Appendiceal Resection Margin in Low-Grade Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasms, Warrant Additional Surgery? Our Institution Experience and Literature Review.
Review 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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consensus Guideline for the Management of Patients with Appendiceal Tumors, Part 1: Appendiceal Tumors Without Peritoneal Involvement.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Low-Grade Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasm Presenting as an Appendiceal Mucocele: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- When 'Mucocele' Isn't Just a Mucocele: Diagnostic Pathways and Surgical Management of Appendiceal Mucinous Lesions in a 10-Year Cohort.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm vs. high-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm: similarities, differences, and current management challenges.Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland) · 2026Review
- Clinicopathological Profile and Management of Appendiceal Neoplasm: An Observational Study.JNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association · 2025Observational
- Appendiceal mucinous neoplasms: Optimizing treatment strategies based on clinical, histological, and molecular features.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Acellular mucin in neoplastic and non-neoplastic conditions of the lower gastrointestinal tract.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Active surveillance for low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN).Pleura and peritoneum · 2024Article
- Extra-abdominal growth of a large low-grade appendiceal mucinous tumour through the femoral canal-a rare case report.Frontiers in oncology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManagement of low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) with positive resection margin is controversial. Some guidelines recommend surgical reexcision, whereas others recommend a conservative approach. The purpose of our study was to determine whether involvement of the resection margin by LAMN is a risk factor for local recurrence requiring additional surgery.
designThis is a retrospective study (January 2000-December 2020) of uncomplicated LAMNs with neoplastic epithelium or dissecting mucin at the resection margin. For cases treated with additional surgery, the presence of residual tumor was evaluated. Clinical follow-up was attained in all cases. We also conducted a literature review.
resultsThe study investigated 98 patients. Eight with median age of 67 (range: 45-91) years had a LAMN involving the resection margin (8.2%). Five of eight LAMNs (62.5%) with neoplastic epithelium at the margin underwent surgery, and no residual neoplasm was identified. The other three cases were followed conservatively, and no patient developed recurrence (follow-up: 18-69 months with a mean of 45 months). In a review of the literature, we identified 52 LAMNs with positive margin. Although three cases had acellular mucin and one residual LAMN in the reexcision specimen (7.7%), neither of these four cases or any of the other 46 followed conservatively had recurrence of disease.
conclusionsThese data suggest that for patients with uncomplicated LAMN confined to the appendix, the involvement of the appendiceal margin does not necessary lead to recurrence of LAMN, and a conservative management is a reasonable alternative.
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.