Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37553135›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastric cancer2023

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Gastrectomy for Patients With Gastric Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study Based on the Korean Gastric Cancer Association Nationwide Survey.

Seul Ki Oh, Chang Seok Ko, Seong-A Jeong, Jeong Hwan Yook, Moon-Won Yoo, Beom Su Kim, In-Seob Lee, Chung Sik Gong, Sa-Hong Min, Na Young Kim and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastric cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Seul Ki OhDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4155-4312
Chang Seok KoDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. kochs815@amc.seoul.kr.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4155-4312
Seong-A JeongDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Jeong Hwan YookDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7987-5808
Moon-Won YooDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0346-9042
Beom Su KimDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0346-9042
In-Seob LeeDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3099-0140
Chung Sik GongDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5116-609X
Sa-Hong MinDepartment of Stomach Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6150-7935
Na Young KimDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Information Committee of the Korean Gastric Cancer Association
Asan Medical Center · KRUlsan College · KR

Funding

Korean Gastric Cancer Association KGCA2022IC17
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite scientific evidence regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for advanced gastric cancer treatment, its application in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains uncertain. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used the 2019 Korean Gastric Cancer Association nationwide survey database to extract data from 489 patients with primary gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After propensity score matching analysis, we compared the surgical outcomes of 97 patients who underwent LG and 97 patients who underwent open gastrectomy (OG). We investigated the risk factors for postoperative complications using multivariate analysis.

resultsThe operative time was significantly shorter in the OG group. Patients in the LG group had significantly less blood loss than those in the OG group. Hospital stay and overall postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications in the LG group was comparable with that in the OG group (1.03% vs. 4.12%, P=0.215). No statistically significant difference was observed in the number of harvested lymph nodes between the two groups (38.60 vs. 35.79, P=0.182). Multivariate analysis identified body mass index (odds ratio [OR], 1.824; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.029-3.234; P=0.040) and extent of resection (OR, 3.154; 95% CI, 1.084-9.174; P=0.035) as independent risk factors for overall postoperative complications.

conclusionsUsing a large nationwide multicenter survey database, we demonstrated that LG and OG had comparable short-term outcomes in patients with gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Indexed as

ComplicationGastrectomyGastric cancerNeoadjuvant chemotherapy

Identifiers

PMID37553135
PMCPMC10412975
OpenAlexW4385414822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.