Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38791927›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Range of Resection in Endometrial Cancer-Clinical Issues of Made-to-Measure Surgery.

Agnieszka Horala, Sebastian Szubert, Ewa Nowak-Markwitz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Agnieszka HoralaDivision of Gynaecological Oncology, Department of Gynaecology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 61-701 Poznan, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5390-9213
Sebastian SzubertDivision of Gynaecological Oncology, Department of Gynaecology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 61-701 Poznan, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3313-7188
Ewa Nowak-MarkwitzDivision of Gynaecological Oncology, Department of Gynaecology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 61-701 Poznan, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endometrial cancer (EC) poses a significant health issue among women, and its incidence has been rising for a couple of decades. Surgery remains its principal treatment method and may have a curative, staging, or palliative aim. The type and extent of surgery depends on many factors, and the risks and benefits should be carefully weighed. While simple hysterectomy might be sufficient in early stage EC, modified-radical hysterectomy is sometimes indicated. In advanced disease, the evidence suggests that, similarly to ovarian cancer, optimal cytoreduction improves survival rate. The role of lymphadenectomy in EC patients has long been a controversial issue. The rationale for systematic lymphadenectomy and the procedure of the sentinel lymph node biopsy are thoroughly discussed. Finally, the impact of the molecular classification and new International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system on EC treatment is outlined. Due to the increasing knowledge on the pathology and molecular features of EC, as well as the new advances in the adjuvant therapies, the surgical management of EC has become more complex. In the modern approach, it is essential to adjust the extent of the surgery to a specific patient, ensuring an optimal, made-to-measure personalized surgery. This narrative review focuses on the intricacies of surgical management of EC and aims at summarizing the available literature on the subject, providing an up-to-date clinical guide.

Indexed as

endometrial cancerendometrial neoplasmsgynecologic cancerlymphadenectomymolecular subtypessentinel lymph nodesurgeryuterine cancer

Identifiers

PMID38791927
PMCPMC11120042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.