Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 844

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Open access
Wagner, M, Redaelli, C, Lietz, M, Seiler, C A, Friess, H, Büchler, M W·2004·British Journal of Surgery

Abstract

Background: Mortality rates associated with pancreatic resection for cancer have steadily decreased with time, but improvements in long-term survival are less clear. This prospective study evaluated risk factors for survival after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Methods: Data from 366 consecutive patients recorded prospectively between November 1993 and September 2001 were analysed using univariate and multivariate models. Results: Fifty-eight patients (15·8 per cent) underwent surgical exploration only, 97 patients (26·5 per cent) underwent palliative bypass surgery and 211 patients (57·7 per cent) resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Stage I disease was present in 9·0 per cent, stage II in 18·0 per cent, stage III in 68·7 per cent and stage IV in 4·3 per cent of patients who underwent resection. Resection was curative (R0) in 75·8 per cent of patients. Procedures included pylorus-preserving Whipple resection (41·2 per cent), classical Whipple resection (37·0 per cent), left pancreatic resection (13·7 per cent) and total pancreatectomy (8·1 per cent). The in-hospital mortality and cumulative morbidity rates were 2·8 and 44·1 per cent respectively. The overall actuarial 5-year survival rate was 19·8 per cent after resection. Survival was better after curative resection (R0) (24·2 per cent) and in lymph-node negative patients (31·6 per cent). A Cox proportional hazards survival analysis indicated that curative resection was the most powerful independent predictor of long-term survival. Conclusion: Resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma can be performed safely. The overall survival rate is determined by the radicality of resection. Patients deemed fit for surgery who have no radiological signs of distant metastasis should undergo surgical exploration. Resection should follow if there is a reasonable likelihood that an R0 resection can be obtained.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bjs.4484

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 844

Metadata

Authors
Wagner, M., Redaelli, C., Lietz, M., Seiler, C. A., Friess, H., & Büchler, M. W.
Venue
British Journal of Surgery
Published
2004-03-22
Volume
91
Issue
5
Pages
586-594
ISSN
  • 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2168
OpenAlex
W2087133203
Cited by
844
References
0
FWCI
14.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bjs.4484
The paper
Wagner, M., Redaelli, C., Lietz, M., Seiler, C. A., Friess, H., & Büchler, M. W. (2004). Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. British Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4484

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.