ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
D3 Lymph Node Dissection Improves Survival Outcomes in Patients With cT2 Colorectal Non-well-differentiated Adenocarcinoma.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dissection of lymph node on longevity in breast and colorectal operation.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Surgical treatment of colorectal cancer: A multidimensional review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimThe extent of lymphadenectomy appropriate for patients with cT2 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. This study was conducted to compare the survival outcomes of patients with cT2 CRC after D3 or D2 lymph node dissection (LND). PATIENTS AND
methodsQualifying subjects (N=590) had undergone radical colorectal resections for cT2 CRC and were grouped according to tumor histological type as either well-differentiated (WDA) or non-well-differentiated (nWDA) adenocarcinoma. Each group was further stratified into D3 or D2 LND according to the extent of lymph node dissection. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance potential confounding factors, and identify independent prognostic risk factors using Cox regression analysis. Primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival, (CSS) and relapse-free survival rate (RFS).
resultsPrior to PSM, OS and CSS differed significantly (p=0.001 and p=0.021, respectively) for D3 and D2 LND subsets in the nWDA group. Estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and CSS were 3 [95% confidence interval (CI)=1.3-6.8; p=0.0084] and 3.2 (95%CI=1-10; p=0.047), respectively, in the D3 LND subset. After matching, significant differences in OS (p=0.007) and CSS (p=0.012) were also observed, with corresponding estimated HRs of 4 (95%CI=1.2-14; p=0.028) and 16 (95%CI=1.2-220; p=0.034). In the WDA group, D2 and D3 LND procedures displayed similar favorable prognoses before and after matching. Postoperative complications emerged as independent risk factors for prognosis in the WDA group of patients with cT2 CRC.
conclusionD3 LND improved survival outcomes in patients with non-well-differentiated cT2 CRC. In patients with well-differentiated cT2 adenocarcinoma, D3 LND was preferred to reduce perioperative complications.
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.