ArticleBMC gastroenterology2026
Impact of lymph node dissection on textbook outcomes in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multi-center analysis.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the association between lymph node dissection (LND) and Textbook Outcomes (TO) in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC).
methodsThis retrospective multicenter study was registered in the Research Registry (registration number: researchregistry10392). We included patients treated at four major hospitals between 2011 and 2017. TO was defined as negative surgical margins, no perioperative blood transfusion, no postoperative complications, no prolonged length of stay (LOS ≤ the 50th percentile of the total cohort), no readmission within 30 days after discharge, and no postoperative death within 30 days. A random forest algorithm was used to determine the relative importance of factors associated with TO achievement. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify patients who may benefit from LND. Adjusted TO was defined as achievement of both the conventional TO criteria and LND.
resultsA total of 376 patients were included in this study. Random forest analysis showed that LND was associated with the likelihood of achieving TO. Patients who underwent LND had higher rates of postoperative complications and longer hospital stays. Further analyses indicated that LND did not adversely affect overall prognosis and may contribute to prognostic stratification.
conclusionsLND may reduce the rate of achieving TO in the short term; however, its value for long-term prognosis and postoperative treatment planning should not be overlooked.
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.