ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
A new selective mediastinal lymph node dissection for clinical peripheral stage IA invasive non-small-cell lung cancer: a propensity-score matching study.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal extent of lymph node resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a topic of debate in the medical community. We aimed to assess the surgical and prognostic outcomes based on the extent of mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND) for resectable clinical stage IA NSCLC. Methods: From 2016 to 2018, 1,166 patients with clinical stage IA NSCLC who underwent lobectomy or segmentectomy with complete mediastinal lymph node dissection (C-MLND) or selective mediastinal lymph node dissection (S-MLND) at five hospitals were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce selection bias. Perioperative parameters, postoperative complications, survival and disease control were compared between the groups. Results: S-MLND and C-MLND were performed on 197 and 969 patients, respectively. After PSM, each group comprised 126 patients and there was no significant difference in 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) (C-MLND Conclusions: S-MLND demonstrated outcomes that were comparable to those of C-MLND and a reduction in complications, indicating the potential of S-MLND as an alternative approach for selected patients with stage IA NSCLC. Prospective, randomized trials are recommended to confirm these findings and establish clear clinical guidelines.
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.