ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Correlation analysis of the extent of lymph node dissection in laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer and long-term prognosis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The extent of lymph node dissection (D1, D2, D3) during laparoscopic radical resection for colon cancer has significant implications on survival, recurrence, and postoperative outcomes. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of these dissection strategies. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted, analyzing medical records of 100 patients diagnosed with stage I, II, or III colon cancer. Patients were grouped based on the lymphadenectomy strategy: D1 (reduced), D2 (standard), or D3 (extended). The primary endpoints included overall survival (OS), recurrence rates and disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints included postoperative complications, and quality of life (QoL). Results: The 5-year survival rate was highest in the D3 group (82%), followed by D2 (75%), and D1 (65%) ( Conclusion: D3 lymphadenectomy provided the best oncological outcomes but increased surgical morbidity, making it suitable for high-risk patients. D2 offered a balanced approach with moderate survival benefits and fewer complications, while D1 may have sufficed for low-risk cases. The choice of dissection strategy should have been individualized based on patient risk factors and tumor characteristics.
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.