ArticleANZ journal of surgery2025
Defining an Unresectable Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.
Article in ANZ journal of surgery, 2025. 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.
- Defining an Unresectable Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma.ANZ journal of surgery · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) comprise a heterogenous group of rare mesenchymal tumours. A complete macroscopic en bloc resection of the tumour with involved adjacent structures is the only curative treatment modality. There remain no consensus criteria regarding the definition of a resectable versus unresectable RPS. This study examined the rate, rationale and outcomes for resectable and unresectable RPS from a single large tertiary referral centre.
methodsAll patients with primary non-metastatic RPS referred between January 2017 and March 2023 were identified. Patient and tumour details as well as survival analyses were compared between resectable and unresectable cohorts, and factors for unresectability were analysed.
resultsA total of 104 patients were considered for the analysis, of which 91 (87.5%) were resectable and 13 (12.5%) unresectable. Gender, age, tumour size and side were similar in both cohorts. Unresectability was determined on pre-operative imaging in seven patients (53.8%) and intra-operatively in six (46.2%) patients. The most common technical cause for unresectability was the involvement of superior mesenteric vessels (38.5%). At a median follow-up of 18 months, 84.6% of the unresectable cohort and 8.8% of the resectable cohort had died.
conclusionApproximately 12% of patients with primary RPS were unresectable at presentation, and in most cases, unresectability can be determined pre-operatively. Defining resectable and unresectable disease may improve the prognostication and management for patients with primary RPS.
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.