The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic nodal dissection in the intrathoracic staging of patients with non–small cell lung cancer
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE Although systematic nodal dissection is accepted as an important component of the intrathoracic staging of disease in patients undergoing thoracotomy for lung cancer, many surgeons still do not routinely perform it. We reviewed our practice to assess the information provided by its routine application even when lymph node metastases are considered unlikely. METHODS The records of 240 patients undergoing thoracotomy for clinically staged cT1-3 N0-1 non-small cell lung cancer were reviewed. In 5 cases (2%) mediastinal dissection was not performed because of specific contraindications and in 8 cases (3%) exploratory thoracotomy was performed. The pathologic findings in the 227 patients who underwent pulmonary resection with systematic nodal dissection were analyzed. RESULTS The median number of nodal stations, including N1 and N2, examined and submitted separately for histologic assessment was 7 per patient (range 3-13). N2 disease was disclosed in 46 patients overall (20%), including 41 of the 227 patients undergoing pulmonary resection (18%) and 5 of those undergoing exploratory thoracotomy (62.5%). No subgroup had a 0% incidence of N2 metastases. Multivariate analysis showed that younger age, increasing tumor size, left lower lobe origin, and bronchial origin were significant independent variables for prediction of lymph node metastases at the N1 level, the N2 level, or both. CONCLUSIONS Because no clinical or pathologic subset of patients with a negligible incidence of N2 disease could be discriminated, systematic nodal dissection must be routinely employed for accurate intrathoracic staging of non-small cell lung cancer.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Bernard, G. R., Artigas, A., Brigham, K. L., Carlet, J., Falke, K., Hudson, L., Lamy, M., Legall, J. R., Morris, A., & Spragg, R. (1994) · American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.149.3.7509706 · Cited by 6,746
Cited by
Kaiser, L. R. (2000) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/s1072-7515(99)00256-2 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Graham, A. N. J., Chan, K. J. M., Pastorino, U., & Goldstraw, P.
- Venue
- The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1999-02
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 246-251
- ISSN
- 0022-5223 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1999488778
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.49
- 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: Systematic nodal dissection in the intrathoracic staging of patients with non–small cell lung cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-5223(99)70419-8
- The paper
- Graham, A. N. J., Chan, K. J. M., Pastorino, U., & Goldstraw, P. (1999). Systematic nodal dissection in the intrathoracic staging of patients with non–small cell lung cancer. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5223(99)70419-8
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.