ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
4L lymph node dissection in non-small cell lung cancer: an updated systematic review and subgroup meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with lymph node involvement being a key prognostic factor. Systemic mediastinal lymph node dissection is a standard component of surgical treatment; however, the role of specific nodal stations, such as the left lower paratracheal (4L) lymph nodes, remains controversial. While some studies suggest that 4L lymph node dissection (4LND+) may improve overall survival (OS), others raise concerns about increased complication rates. Current guidelines provide no clear consensus on whether 4LND+ should be performed routinely. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the effects of 4LND+ in patients with left-sided NSCLC on OS and complication rates, with subgroup analyses for stage I NSCLC, left upper lobe (LUL) and left lower lobe (LLL) tumors. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Wiley for studies comparing outcomes between patients with NSCLC undergoing or not undergoing 4LND+. The primary endpoint was OS, while secondary endpoints focused on complication rates. Subgroup analyses examined differences in stage I, LUL and LLL tumors. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.1.7 (Cochrane Collaboration), and heterogeneity was assessed with I Results: Patients in the 4LND+ group showed improved OS compared to the lack of left paratracheal lymph node dissection (4LND-) group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62-0.96; P=0.02; I Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides limited evidence that 4LND+ may offer a survival benefit in patients with left-sided NSCLC. However, the significant heterogeneity observed in the primary analysis and the lack of statistical significance in the PSM/propensity score weighting (PSW) subgroup suggest cautious interpretation of the observed survival benefit. Contrary, it is associated with increased overall complication rates, including vocal cord palsy, which underscores the need for careful patient selection. Given the lack of OS benefit in stage I disease, 4LND+ may be more appropriate for patients with more advanced NSCLC. However, further prospective studies are needed to better define its role.
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.