ArticleTurkish journal of surgery2023
Histopathological evaluation after pancreatic surgery: Comparison of the results of HPB-specific pathologists and non-specific pathologists.
Article in Turkish journal of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the results of the evaluation of HPB-specific pathologists and general pathologists on the specimens of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy by the same surgical team. Material and Methods: The pathological results of 159 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in the periampullary region was retrospectively examined. Histopathological evaluation results of HPB-specific pathologist (S group) and other pathologists (NS group) were compared. Tumor size (mm), total lymph nodes, metastatic lymph nodes, surgical margin positive/negative (RO/R1/R2 resection) and data of patients who underwent vascular resection were evaluated. Results: The specimens of 91 patients were examined by a HPB-specific pathologist (S group), and the specimens of 68 patients were examined by non-specific pathologists (NS group). When compared in terms of the average total number of lymph nodes and metastatic lymph nodes dissected, a statistically significant result was observed (p= 0.04, p <0.01 respectively). Additionally, surgical margin positivity (R1) was found to be statistically higher in the S group (p= 0.02). Conclusion: In order for the success of HPB surgery to be reflected in the clinic, it is of great importance that the specimens are examined by HPBspecific pathologists.
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.