SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. 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.
- MORPHology and Inter-observer Variation in Peritoneal Disease Assessment Among Expert Peritoneal Malignancy SUrgeonS: The MORPHEUS study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Survival impact of bowel resection at the time of interval cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer: a retrospective cohort study using inverse probability of treatment weighting.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundCytoreductive surgery (CRS) is a widely acknowledged treatment approach for peritoneal metastasis, showing favorable prognosis and long-term survival. Intraoperative scoring systems quantify tumoral burden before CRS and may predict complete cytoreduction (CC). This study reviews the intraoperative scoring systems for predicting CC and optimal cytoreduction (OC) and evaluates the predictive performance of the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) and Predictive Index Value (PIV).
methodsSystematic searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed to compare the absolute predictive performances of PCI and PIV.
resultsThirty-eight studies (5834 patients) focusing on gynecological (n = 34; 89.5%), gastrointestinal (n = 2; 5.3%) malignancies, and on tumors of various origins (n = 2; 5.3%) were identified. Seventy-seven models assessing the predictive performance of scoring systems (54 for CC and 23 for OC) were identified with PCI (n = 39/77) and PIV (n = 16/77) being the most common. Twenty models (26.0%) reinterpreted previous scoring systems of which ten (13%) used a modified version of PIV (reclassification). Meta-analyses of models predicting CC based on PCI (n = 21) and PIV (n = 8) provided an AUC estimate of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.86; Q = 119.6, p = 0.0001; I
conclusionsPeritoneal Cancer Index models demonstrate an excellent estimate of CC, while PIV shows an acceptable performance. There is a need for high-quality studies to address management differences, establish standardized cutoff values, and focus on non-gynecological malignancies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38918326What 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.