ReviewCurrent opinion in oncology2025
Endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for vulvar cancer, is it feasible?
Review in Current opinion in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe evaluation of lymph node status is crucial for the correct staging of patients with vulvar carcinoma and to assess whether adjuvant treatment is necessary. Classically, this procedure is performed with an open approach to the inguinal region; however, this procedure is associated with a significant complication rate.For this reason, the video-endoscopic approach to inguinal lymph node assessment has been proposed in recent years. This review aimed to provide an overview on the feasibility and outcomes of the video-endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL). RECENT
findingsVEIL appeared to be a viable alternative to the open approach, with similar outcomes in terms of the number of lymph nodes removed and blood loss. While the postoperative complications rate was lower in the VEIL group, operative times tended to be longer. This may be due to the lack of standardization of the technique and to the variability in video-endoscopic approaches (laparoscopic vs robotic). Sentinel lymph node biopsy with endoscopic approach has also been described. SUMMARY: VEIL appears to be feasible and safe, adding benefits in terms of postoperative complications. Nevertheless, few studies are available and further data is needed to confirm these findings.
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.