Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39737148›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024

Surgical navigation for targeted retroperitoneal lymph-node removal: a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

Harald C Groen, Esther M K Wit, Wouter J Heerink, Koert F D Kuhlmann, Jasper A Nijkamp, Ruben van Veen, Ivo G Schoots, Sara Balduzzi, Henry J M A A Zijlmans, Pim J van Leeuwen and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05867095 (Targeted Abdominal Lymph nodE Dissections Randomized for Surgical NavigaTion), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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.

NCT05867095 nacompletednot on this map

Targeted Abdominal Lymph nodE Dissections Randomized for Surgical NavigaTion (TALENT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Netherlands Cancer InstituteRan2017 to 2021Enrolled69ConditionsImage-guide Surgery, Lymph Node MetastasisArmsSurgical navigation, Conventional
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Performance of a tracked ultrasound navigation setup for pediatric tumor surgery: a phantom study.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

12 authors.

Harald C GroenDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Esther M K WitDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Wouter J HeerinkDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Koert F D KuhlmannDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Jasper A NijkampDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Ruben van VeenDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Ivo G SchootsDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Sara BalduzziDepartment of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Henry J M A A ZijlmansDepartment of Gynecology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Pim J van LeeuwenDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Henk G van der PoelDepartment of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Theo J M RuersDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Metastatic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (LND) for nodal recurrence is applied for a variety of cancers, such as urological, gynaecological and rectal cancer. Precise localisation and resection of these lymph nodes (LNs) during surgery can be challenging, especially after previous radiotherapy or surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the added value of surgical navigation for targeted LND in the retroperitoneum. Methods: We performed an open-label randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial at the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam. Eligible participants were over 18 years of age, scheduled for targeted retroperitoneal LND by laparotomy, with removal of one or more suspected (targeted) LN(s) as assessed by diagnostic imaging. Patients were randomised (1:1) between conventional LND and LND using surgical navigation, by means of a minimisation method stratified for tumour origin (urological, colorectal and other). For the surgical navigation, a digital 3D model of the patients' anatomy was created from diagnostic CT scans, including delineation of the targeted LN(s). The 3D model was linked to the patients' position in the operation room. Using an electromagnetic tracking system, with a sterile tracked pointer, the actual position of the pointer was shown in the 3D model, enabling the surgeon to localize the targeted LN(s). The primary outcome of the study was the percentage of successful procedures. Success was defined as no residual target LN(s) visible on postoperative CT imaging. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05867095. Findings: From January 2017 to December 2020, 69 participants were included in the study, 35 (51%) in the conventional arm and 34 (49%) in the navigation arm. Four patients were not evaluable and excluded from further analysis; three in the conventional arm (patients withdraw from study participation), one in the navigation arm (discontinued surgery, misclassified diagnosis). According to intention-to-treat analysis, 50% (16/32) of the surgical procedures was successful in the conventional arm, versus 85% (28/33) in the surgical navigation arm (one-tailed p = 0.0028, 90% CI: 14%-56%). Using the Clavien-Dindo classification, the overall complication rate was comparable between the conventional arm and the navigation arm. Surgeons judged the surgical navigation setup as valuable, the median preference score to use surgical navigation was 3.7 (3.3-4.0) (scale 1-5), and the median system usability score was 75 (70-85) (scale 0-100). Interpretation: Surgical navigation allows for significantly better localisation and removal of target LN(s) in the retroperitoneum. Funding: This research was supported by the KWF-Alpe d'HuZes (NKI 2014-6596) and by an institutional grant of The Dutch Cancer Society and of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport.

Indexed as

3D model for surgical localisationElectromagnetic trackingRetroperitoneal lymph node dissectionSurgical navigation

Identifiers

PMID39737148
PMCPMC11683954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.