Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38177461›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of surgical oncology2024

Robot-Assisted Pelvic Dissection for Enlarged Lymph Nodes in Melanoma Improves Recovery with Equivalent Oncological Outcomes to Open Pelvic Dissection.

Amit Roshan, Bhumi Shah, Keith D Anderson, Suzanne Murphy, Benjamin Thomas, Arthur S McPhee, Benjamin W Lamb, Amer J Durrani, Animesh J K Patel

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. 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 26% 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. Review
  3. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Amit RoshanCancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. amit.roshan@cruk.cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2034-2759
Bhumi ShahSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Keith D AndersonDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Suzanne MurphyDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5589-0774
Benjamin ThomasDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1330-122X
Arthur S McPheeDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Benjamin W LambDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2220-893X
Amer J DurraniDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6105-258X
Animesh J K PatelDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

Cancer Research UK C64667/A27958
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection (rPLND) has been reported in heterogenous groups of patients with melanoma, including macroscopic or at-high-risk-for microscopic metastasis. With changing indications for surgery in melanoma, and availability of effective systemic therapies, pelvic dissection is now performed for clinically detected bulky lymph node metastasis followed by adjuvant drug therapy. rPLND has not been compared with open pelvic lymph node dissection (oPLND) for modern practice.

methodsAll patients undergoing pelvic node dissection for macroscopic melanoma at a single institution were reviewed as a cohort, observational study.

resultsTwenty-two pelvic lymph node dissections were identified (8 oPLND; 14 rPLND). The number of pelvic lymph nodes removed was similar (median oPLND 6.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 6.0-12.5] versus rPLND 6.0 [3.75-9.0]), with frequent matted nodes (11/22, 50.0%). Operative time (median oPLND 130 min [IQR 95.5-182] versus rPLND 126 min [IQR 97.8-160]) and complications (Clavien-Dindo scale) were similar. Length of hospital stay (median 5.34 days (IQR 3.77-6.94) versus 1.98 days (IQR 1.39-3.50) and time to postoperative adjuvant therapy (median 11.6 weeks [IQR 10.6-18.5] versus 7.71 weeks [IQR 6.29-10.4]) were shorter in the rPLND group. No differences in pelvic lymph node recurrence (p = 0.984), distant metastatic recurrence (p = 0.678), or melanoma-specific survival (p = 0.655) were seen (median follow-up 21.1 months [rPLND] and 25.7 months [oPLND]).

conclusionsrPLND is an effective way to remove bulky pelvic lymph nodes in melanoma, with a shorter recovery and reduced interval to initiating adjuvant therapy compared with oPLND. This group of patients may especially benefit from neoadjuvant systemic approaches to management.

Indexed as

LymphadenopathyMelanomaRoboticsHumansLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesPelvisRetroperitoneal SpaceRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID38177461
PMCPMC10908615
OpenAlexW4390578017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.