ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Influence of resection distance on vulvar cancer relapse: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk Factors for Recurrence in Vulvar Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Vulvar Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Scientific Progress and Impacts to Pathology Practice.International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates the effect of resection margin distance on disease-free survival (DFS) and (local) recurrence rates in patients with vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) while assessing the impact of associated factors such as lichen sclerosus (LS) and lymph node metastasis.
methodsA retrospective single-center analysis was conducted on 150 patients treated for vulvar SCC between 2004 and 2014 at University Hospital Düsseldorf. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of clinical and pathological factors on DFS. Additionally, a literature review was conducted to summarize existing evidence on resection margins.
resultsThe findings suggest that a resection margin exceeding 8 mm does not significantly improve DFS (HR 1.14, CI 1.01-1.28, p = 0.029). LS was significantly associated with recurrence (HR 2.36, CI 1.13-4.91, p = 0.02) and reduced DFS. Univariate analysis identified lymph node metastasis as a significant predictor of DFS; however, this association was not retained in multivariate analysis.
conclusionAlthough current guidelines advocate for resection margins >8 mm, our findings suggest that smaller margins may be acceptable in selected patients, particularly those without LS and tumors located near critical structures (e.g., the anus, clitoris, or urethra). These considerations should inform personalized treatment strategies and follow-up care.
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.