ArticleGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2026
From operating room to pathology report: Delphi consensus on pathological assessment of peritoneal cytology and biopsies in staging laparoscopy for gastric cancer.
Article in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStaging laparoscopy with peritoneal cytology and biopsies is recommended in selected patients with gastric cancer (GC), but practical guidance for assessment of peritoneal lavage/ascites and peritoneal biopsies is lacking. We aimed to develop consensus-based recommendations for handling, assessing and reporting of these specimens.
methodsA modified Delphi study was conducted among Dutch experts in GC (cyto)pathology. In round 1, sixty-two statements on clinical information, specimen requirements, initial assessment, ancillary testing, biomarker testing and reporting were rated on a 3-point scale (agree/neutral/disagree); consensus was predefined as ≥ 80% agreement. Non-consensus statements were discussed in an online meeting, informed by comments and literature review, revised, and re-rated in Round 2 on a dichotomous agree/disagree scale, with consensus defined as ≥ 70% agreement.
resultsThirty-one experts from university, general, and independent pathology practices participated. Consensus was achieved for 39 of 62 statements (63%) in Round 1 and for 58 of 62 statements (94%) after Round 2. Consensus was achieved on required clinical information from surgeons, specimen submission and handling, cytological and histological assessment, use of ancillary immunocytochemistry/immunohistochemistry, structured reporting categories, and approaches to biomarker testing on peritoneal biopsies. The study also resulted in structured reporting templates for peritoneal cytology and biopsies.
conclusionThis Delphi study achieved broad expert consensus on pathological assessment of peritoneal fluid and biopsies obtained during staging laparoscopy in GC patients. The resulting recommendations and structured reporting templates provide a practical framework to harmonise specimen handling, evaluation and reporting, thereby promoting greater standardisation and consistency in GC staging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42828570What 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.