Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42131273›Full record

ReviewNagoya journal of medical science2026

Knacks and pitfalls of retroperitoneal sarcoma surgery, part 1: preparation for tumor resection.

Yukihiro Yokoyama, Masaki Sunagawa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nagoya journal of medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yukihiro YokoyamaDivision of Perioperative Medicine, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Masaki SunagawaDivision of Perioperative Medicine, Department of Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) is a rare malignancy, it is unlikely that a general surgeon would go through their career without encountering at least one case. Surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment and is performed in many institutions worldwide. However, given its low incidence, most centers manage only one or two cases annually, resulting in limited operative experience among surgeons. The clinical presentation of RPS varies widely depending on the tumor location and extent of invasion into adjacent organs and major vessels. This heterogeneity poses a challenge in standardizing surgical techniques and demands a high level of intraoperative adaptability. RPS is commonly found as large tumors, precluding the use of minimally invasive approaches, such as laparoscopy or robotic surgery. The retroperitoneal space also contains critical vascular structures, and inappropriate surgical approaches may lead to life-threatening hemorrhage. At Nagoya University Rare Cancer Center, numerous RPS surgeries have been performed. Through this experience, various technical considerations essential for safe and effective surgery were identified. This article introduces key operative strategies for RPS, including technical "knacks and pitfalls," derived from extensive clinical experience with RPS surgery. Part 1 discusses general preparations that are specifically required for RPS surgery. Part 2 focuses on the details of the practical techniques of the RPS surgery. Finally, part 3 discusses resection of the tumor involving large retroperitoneal vessels, which need special preparations.

Indexed as

Retroperitoneal NeoplasmsSarcomaHumansLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical Proceduresretroperitoneal mobilizationretroperitoneal sarcomasurgery

Identifiers

PMID42131273
PMCPMC13167230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.