ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2026
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As a cutting-edge advancement in the field of minimally invasive surgery, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) represents a significant evolution from traditional multi-port approaches toward minimizing surgical stress and optimizing cosmetic outcomes in gastrointestinal oncology. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of SILS and multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) in D2 lymphadenectomy of locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) radical surgery, so as to provide an evidence-based basis for clinical operation selection. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020, we included studies comparing SILS and MPLS in LAGC patients undergoing D2 lymphadenectomy [PICOS: P: LAGC patients; I: SILS; C: MPLS; O: complications, lymph node yield, survival; S: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies]. A systematic search was updated through September 2025 in Chinese and English databases. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0 (RCTs) and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) (retrospective studies). Results: A total of 10 articles (6 RCTs and 4 retrospective studies) involving 1,892 patients were analyzed. Stratified analysis by study design showed that in the RCT subgroup (n=6), there were no significant differences in complication rates [odds ratio (OR) =0.87, P=0.18] or the number of lymph nodes dissected [standardized mean difference (SMD) =-0.08, P=0.15]. Results from the retrospective subgroup (n=4) were consistent with those of the RCTs. Across all evidence levels, SILS significantly reduced blood loss (SMD =-0.31, P<0.001) and yielded smaller incision lengths (SMD =-2.41, P<0.001). Conclusions: Based on the synthesis of currently available moderate-to-high quality evidence, SILS in LAGC radical resection achieves comparable oncological radicality to MPLS. While SILS significantly enhances perioperative recovery and minimally invasive benefits, the findings are subject to the inherent limitations of the included study designs.
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.