ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Optimal Approach to Surgical Management of Goblet Cell Carcinoid of the Appendix: A Systematic Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surgical Extent and Long-term Survival in Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Pooled it
- High interobserver variability exists in grading appendiceal goblet cell adenocarcinoma using World Health Organization 5th edition criteria.Histopathology · 2026Article
- Letter to the editor: A critical look at the surgical management of appendiceal goblet-cell adenocarcinoma.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGoblet cell carcinoid (GCC) is a rare and poorly understood appendiceal neoplasm, exhibiting mixed histological and aggressive clinical features. Current guidelines recommend right hemicolectomy in all cases, although there is conflicting evidence that appendicectomy alone may be sufficient. This review aims to identify the optimal surgical management for appendiceal GCC.
methodsA systematic review was performed by searching MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials, cohort studies or large case series (>5 patients) reporting clinical outcomes for patients undergoing surgical management of GCC of the appendix were included. Outcomes extracted included participant and tumour characteristics, type of surgery and survival data.
resultsA total of 1341 studies were retrieved. After duplicate removal, 796 titles were screened for relevance prior to abstract and full text review. A total of six studies were included for analysis, comprising 3177 patients-1629 females and 1548 males. The median age ranged from 51 to 72 years. A total of 2329 patients underwent right hemicolectomy, while 824 were treated with appendicectomy only. Overall, the included studies report increased survival in patients undergoing right hemicolectomy compared to appendicectomy alone. A meta-analysis was not possible due to insufficient data reported in the published literature to date.
conclusionsThere is no consensus regarding the optimal surgical management of appendiceal GCC, as outcomes-based data comparing surgical interventions are lacking. It is possible that some patients with favourable features are overtreated. The absence of robust evidence to support a more conservative approach means that right hemicolectomy remains the standard of care for all patients, in keeping with current international guidelines. The rarity of this condition and limited data in the published studies remain barriers to evidence-based best clinical practice.
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.