ArticlePloS one2024
Comparison of postoperative complications in mediastinal lymph node dissection versus mediastinal lymph node sampling for early stage non-small cell lung cancer: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interpretable Deep Learning with Multi-Scale CT for Predicting Occult Lymph Node Metastasis in Early-Stage NSCLC: A Multicenter Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Construction and validation of a predictive model for benefits of tunnel-type mediastinal lymph node dissection in lung cancer patients based on the SEER database.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Survival Nomogram for Lung Adenocarcinoma Patients With Bone Metastasis Based on the SEER Database and an External Validation Cohort.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Risk factors for mediastinal lymph node metastases in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer and prediction model establishment.American journal of cancer research · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung cancer is the primary cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The most effective treatment for early stage (I-II) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is surgical resection. However, the extent of mediastinal lymph nodes removal required and the impact of their removal remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the postoperative complications in patients with stage I-II NSCLC who received mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND) or mediastinal lymph node sampling (MLNS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: According to the predefined inclusion criteria, we will conduct a comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining the postoperative complications of MLND compared to MLNS in patients with stage I-II NSCLC. The search will be performed across multiple databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, Sinomed, VIP, Duxiu, and Web of Science from inception to February 2024. Additionally, relevant literature references will be retrieved and hand searching of pertinent journals will be conducted. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment will be performed by two independent reviewers. Review Manager 5.4 will be applied in analyzing and synthesizing. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) will be used to assess the quality of evidence for the whole RCTs and used Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the methodologic quality of observational studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study did not include personal information. Ethical approval was not required for this study. This study is based on a secondary analysis of the literature, so ethical review approval is not required. The final report will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
conclusionThis systematic review will contribute to compare the safety and survival benefits of these two surgical techniques for the treatment of early stage NSCLC, to further guide the selection of surgical approaches.
trial registrationThe protocol of the systematic review has been registered on Open Science Framework, with a registration number of DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/N2Y5D.
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.