ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2024
Clinical characteristics and management of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: A literature review.
Review in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retroperitoneal undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma with aortic and inferior vena cava involvement presenting as right common iliac artery rupture.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2026Article
- Applying Radiomics to Predict Outcomes in Patients with High-Grade Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Treated with Preoperative Radiotherapy.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- End-to-end deep learning model for the diagnosis and segmentation of primary retroperitoneal neoplasm: a multicenter cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- A rare case of primary retroperitoneal mucinous cystadenocarcinoma presenting with recurrent infected psoas abscess.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Clinical characteristics and management of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: A literature review.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) is a rare tumor classified into many histological types. It is also often detected only after it has grown to a considerable size and requires extensive resection of the surrounding organs, making it difficult to offer optimal patient-tailored management. Evidence supporting specific treatment modalities for RPS is insufficient, owing to its rarity. The Japanese clinical practice guidelines for RPS were published in December 2021, with the aim of accumulating existing evidence and indicating the optimal practice for RPS. These guidelines provide important clinical questions (CQs) concerning the diagnosis and treatment of RPS. This review, with a particular focus on primary RPS, attempts to introduce clinical problems in the diagnosis and treatment of RPS and to assess those problems along with the CQs in the guidelines. According to these guidelines, although chemotherapy and radiotherapy are expected to have therapeutic effects, the level of evidence to support these treatments is not very high at present. Accordingly, complete resection of the tumor is the first and only option for managing primary RPS. However, as with other tumors, the demand for multidisciplinary treatment for RPS is increasing. These guidelines will undoubtedly represent a milestone in clinical practice in relation to RPS in the future, and further evidence is expected to be accumulated based on the CQs that have been proposed.
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.