ArticleWorld journal of surgery2026
Per Protocol Analysis and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Radical Resection for Gallbladder Cancer Compared With Open Method.
Article in World journal of surgery, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough laparoscopic radical resection for gallbladder (GB) cancer has been attempted, only a limited number of studies have evaluated its outcomes using a per-protocol analytical approach.
methodsBetween January 2010 and December 2019, 213 patients underwent surgery for gallbladder (GB) cancer at three institutions, of whom 203 consecutive patients with T2 or T3 disease were retrospectively analyzed. Protocol-adherent radical resection (per-protocol) was defined as wedge liver resection or IVb/V bisegmentectomy with the procurement of at least four lymph nodes. Propensity score matching was performed to compare the laparoscopic and open approaches.
resultsProtocol-adherent radical resection was achieved in 14 of 76 patients (18.4%) in the laparoscopic group and in 76 of 127 patients (59.8%) in the open surgery group. The primary unmet criterion for radical resection was an insufficient lymph node yield (60/76, 78.9%) in the laparoscopic group. After 1:1 propensity score matching (54 pairs), the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate did not differ between the laparoscopic and open approaches (46.1% vs. 49.9%; hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.55-1.47; p = 0.668), whereas the disparity in oncological adequacy persisted (protocol-adherent radical resection 20.4% vs. 70.4%). Among patients who achieved protocol-adherent radical resection (N = 90), the exploratory comparison of 5-year OS between the laparoscopic (N = 14) and open (N = 76) groups showed no significant difference (61.5% vs. 53.3%; p = 0.288). Multivariate analysis in patients with protocol-adherent radical resection identified N stage and elevated CA 19-9 levels as independent prognostic factors for OS.
conclusionsRegardless of whether a laparoscopic or open approach is used, radical surgery-including appropriate hepatic resection with the retrieval of at least four lymph nodes-is essential for improving long-term prognosis in patients with GB cancer. N stage and elevated CA 19-9 levels were independently associated with overall survival.
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.