Institutional Research Information Service
UCL Logo
Please report any queries concerning the funding data grouped in the sections named "Externally Awarded" or "Internally Disbursed" (shown on the profile page) to your Research Finance Administrator. Your can find your Research Finance Administrator at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/finance/research/rs-contacts.php by entering your department
Please report any queries concerning the student data shown on the profile page to:

Email: portico-services@ucl.ac.uk

Help Desk: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/portico/helpdesk
Publication Detail
Systematic lymphadenectomy versus sampling of ipsilateral mediastinal lymph-nodes during lobectomy for non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review of randomized trials and a meta-analysis.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Publication Sub Type:
  • Authors:
    Mokhles S, Macbeth F, Treasure T, Younes RN, Rintoul RC, Fiorentino F, Bogers AJJC, Takkenberg JJM
  • Publication date:
  • Pagination:
    1149, 1156
  • Journal:
    European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery
  • Volume:
  • Issue:
  • Medium:
  • Print ISSN:
  • Language:
  • Addresses:
    Department of Cardio-thoracic surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
To re-examine the evidence for recommendations for complete dissection versus sampling of ipsilateral mediastinal lymph nodes during lobectomy for cancer.We searched for randomized trials of systematic mediastinal lymphadenectomy versus mediastinal sampling. We performed a textual analysis of the authors' own starting assumptions and conclusion. We analysed the trial designs and risk of bias. We extracted data on early mortality, perioperative complications, overall survival, local recurrence and distant recurrence for meta-analysis.We found five randomized controlled trials recruiting 1980 patients spanning 1989-2007. The expressed starting position in 3/5 studies was a conviction that systematic dissection was effective. Long-term survival was better with lymphadenectomy compared with sampling (Hazard Ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.69-0.89) as was perioperative survival (Odds Ratio 0.59; 95% CI 0.25-1.36, non-significant). But there was an overall high risk of bias and a lack of intention to treat analysis. There were higher rates (non-significant) of perioperative complications including bleeding, chylothorax and recurrent nerve palsy with lymphadenectomy.The high risk of bias in these trials makes the overall conclusion insecure. The finding of clinically important surgically related morbidities but lower perioperative mortality with lymphadenectomy seems inconsistent. The multiple variables in patients, cancers and available treatments suggest that large pragmatic multicentre trials, testing currently available strategies, are the best way to find out which are more effective. The number of patients affected with lung cancer makes trials feasible.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers
Clinical Operational Research Unit
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by