Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39001540›Full record

ArticleCancers2024

Short- and Long-Term Advantages of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Elderly Patients with Locally Advanced Cancer.

Francesco Puccetti, Lorenzo Cinelli, Stefano Turi, Davide Socci, Riccardo Rosati, Ugo Elmore, On Behalf Of The Osr CCeR Collaborative Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Francesco PuccettiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6638-6880
Lorenzo CinelliDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2186-9421
Stefano TuriDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7365-3510
Davide SocciDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.
Riccardo RosatiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2608-5749
Ugo ElmoreDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9652-1502
On Behalf Of The Osr CCeR Collaborative Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery has provided several clinical advantages in locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) care, although a consensus on its application criteria remains unclear. Surgery remains a careful choice in elderly patients, who frequently present with frailty, comorbidities, and other disabling diseases. This study aims to assess the possible advantages of laparoscopic gastric resections in elderly patients presenting with LAGC. This retrospective study analyzed a single-center series of elderly patients (≥75 years) undergoing curative resections for LAGC between 2015 and 2020. A comparative analysis of open versus laparoscopic approaches was conducted, focusing on postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and long-term survival. A total of 62 patients underwent gastrectomy through an open or a laparoscopic approach (31 pts each). The study population did not show statistically significant differences in demographics, operative risk, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The laparoscopic group reported significantly minimized overall complications (45.2 vs. 71%,

Indexed as

frailtygastrectomygastric cancerlaparoscopypostoperative complications

Identifiers

PMID39001540
PMCPMC11240721

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.