ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Surgical options and survival prognosis in geriatric patients beyond average lifespan with locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe appropriateness of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for super-geriatric patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) is inconclusive, and the prognostic factors are also yet to be elucidated. Herein, we aimed to investigate the surgical and oncological outcomes of LG versus open gastrectomy (OG) for geriatric patients with LAGC who have outlived the average lifespan of the Chinese population (≥ 78 years).
methodsThis is a monocentric, retrospective, comparative study. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize selection bias and ensure well-balanced characteristics. The primary endpoint of interest was 3-year overall survival, while secondary endpoints included procedure-related variables, postoperative recovery indices, and complications. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to identify unfavorable prognostic factors.
resultsOf 196 eligible individuals, 107 underwent LG and 89 underwent OG, with a median age (interquartile range [IQR]) of 82 [79, 84] years. PSM yielded 61 matched pairs, with comparable demographic and tumor characteristics. The LG group had a significantly lower overall complication rate than the OG group (31.1% vs. 49.2%, P = 0.042), as well as shorter duration of postoperative hospital stay [12 (11, 13) vs. 13 (12, 15.5) d, P < 0. 001], less intraoperative blood loss [95 (75, 150) vs. 230 (195, 290) mL, P < 0.001], but a longer operative time [228 (210, 255.5) vs. 196 (180, 219.5) min, P < 0.001]. The times to first aerofluxus, defecation, liquid diet, and half-liquid diet were comparable. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed no significant difference in 3-year overall survival between the groups, either in the entire cohort or in subgroups with different TNM staging. Moreover, Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index scores of > 6 [hazard ratio (HR) 4.003; P = 0.021] and pathologic TNM stage III (HR 3.816, P = 0.023) were independent unfavorable prognostic factors for long-term survival.
conclusionsLG performed by experienced surgeons offers the benefits of comparable or better surgical and oncological safety profiles than OG for super-geriatric patients with LAGC.
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.