ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
A propensity-score-matched comparison of standard and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the difference in perioperative outcomes between standard pelvic lymph node dissection (sPLND) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) in robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and evaluate the survival outcomes. The clinical data were retrospectively collected from patients who underwent RARC between January 2016 and December 2020 in Nanjing Drum Hospital. The patients were divided into sPLND and ePLND group according to the extent of pelvic lymph node dissection. Finally, 80 pairs of patients obtained for two groups by propensity score matching (PSM) and their perioperative and survival outcomes were analyzed. The median number of dissected lymph nodes (LN) after PSM was 13 in sPLND group and 16 in ePLND group (P = 0.004). Perioperative complications were similar between 2 groups. After PSM, ePLND improved 5-year RFS and OS in all patients (85.74 vs. 61.94%, P = 0.004; 82.80 vs. 67.50%, P = 0.033), patients with ≥ T3 disease (73.66 vs. 23.86%; P = 0.007; 68.20 vs. 36.20%; P = 0.032) and patients with LN metastasis (67.70 vs. 7.33%; P = 0.004; 60.60 vs. 16.67%; P = 0.045) compared to sPLND. Extended PLND significantly increased lymph node yield without increasing complication and improved RFS and OS compared to sPLND.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39068352What 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.