ArticleBJS open2023
Impact of circumferential resection margin on survival in ampullary cancer: retrospective analysis.
Article in BJS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic significance of baselineBMC medical imaging · 2026Article
- Extrahepatic biliary obstruction due to ampullary carcinoma in a dog.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2026Article
- Article
- Tissue-probe contact assessment during robotic surgery using single-fiber reflectance spectroscopy.Biomedical optics express · 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
11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmpullary carcinoma is a clinically variable entity. This study aimed to evaluate prognostic factors for the outcome of resected ampullary carcinoma patients with particular intent to analyse the influence of surgical radicality.
methodsPatients undergoing resection between 2002 and 2017 were analysed. Clinicopathological parameters, perioperative outcome and survival were examined. Risk factor analysis for postresection survival was performed. Resection margin status was evaluated according to the revised classification for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
resultsA total of 234 patients were identified, 97.9 per cent (n = 229) underwent formal resection, while 2.1 per cent (n = 5) underwent ampullary resection. Histological subtypes were 46.6 per cent (n = 109) pancreatobiliary, 34.2 per cent (n = 80) intestinal, 11.5 per cent (n = 27) mixed, and 7.7 per cent (n = 18) undetermined. In the pancreatobiliary group, tumours were more advanced with more vascular resections, pT4 stage, G3 differentiation and pN+ status. Five-year overall survival was significantly different for pancreatobiliary compared to intestinal (51.7 per cent versus 72.8 per cent, P = 0.0087). In univariable analysis, age, pT4 stage, pN+, pancreatobiliary subtype and positive resection margin were significantly associated with worse overall survival. Long-term outcome was significantly better after true R0 resection (circumferential resection margin-, tumour clearance >1 mm) compared with circumferential resection margin+ (<1 mm) and R1 resections (5-year overall survival: 69.6 per cent, median overall survival 191 months versus 42.4 per cent and 53 months; P = 0.0017).
conclusionPostresection survival of ampullary carcinoma patients is determined by histological subtype and surgical radicality. Intestinal differentiation is associated with less advanced tumour stages and better differentiation, which is reflected in a significantly better overall survival compared to pancreatobiliary differentiation. Despite this, true R0-resection is a prognostic key determinant in both entities, achieving 5-year survival in two-thirds of patients.
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.