Anatomy current event
Surgical Treatment and Survival in Patients with Liver Metastases from Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies
1.) What do you think of the science behind this article? What did you learn about after reading this article?
I thought this article was very hard to read and understand. I didn’t know a lot about what it was talking about, but I learned about meta- analysis and how it is used to contrast results from different studies to try to find patterns among study results. Also I learned about observational studies which are drawn inferences about the possible effect of a treatment on subjects. I found that a significant longer survival rate is in patients treated with hepatic resection than embolisation HR 0.34 or all other nonsurgical treatments HR 0.45. Also that hepatic resection ( which is the resection of the liver) increases overall survival in patients with liver metastases from GEP-NETs. I also learned what an actual Neuroendocrine tumor is, I learned that it is a neoplasm that arise from cells of the endocrine and nervous system hence, the name. Overall I learned a lot about the endocrine system and nervous system and how they work together and relate along with what meta-analysis is, which was the main part of understanding this article.
2.) Do you agree or disagree with the research or work? Why?
The results formed by observational studies found a significant increased survival after surgical hepatic resection, but randomized clinical trials must be undertaken to achieve more evidence about the role of surgical treatment in patients with liver metastases from NETs. With this analysis they considered a Cox proportional hazards regression model or Kaplan-Meier curves to calculate the survival difference among patients treated with resection of liver metastases and other treatments. This actual study just consisted of finding articles off the internet from Medline, Embase, Ovid, Google Scholar and Cochrane database.
1.) What do you think of the science behind this article? What did you learn about after reading this article?
I thought this article was very hard to read and understand. I didn’t know a lot about what it was talking about, but I learned about meta- analysis and how it is used to contrast results from different studies to try to find patterns among study results. Also I learned about observational studies which are drawn inferences about the possible effect of a treatment on subjects. I found that a significant longer survival rate is in patients treated with hepatic resection than embolisation HR 0.34 or all other nonsurgical treatments HR 0.45. Also that hepatic resection ( which is the resection of the liver) increases overall survival in patients with liver metastases from GEP-NETs. I also learned what an actual Neuroendocrine tumor is, I learned that it is a neoplasm that arise from cells of the endocrine and nervous system hence, the name. Overall I learned a lot about the endocrine system and nervous system and how they work together and relate along with what meta-analysis is, which was the main part of understanding this article.
2.) Do you agree or disagree with the research or work? Why?
The results formed by observational studies found a significant increased survival after surgical hepatic resection, but randomized clinical trials must be undertaken to achieve more evidence about the role of surgical treatment in patients with liver metastases from NETs. With this analysis they considered a Cox proportional hazards regression model or Kaplan-Meier curves to calculate the survival difference among patients treated with resection of liver metastases and other treatments. This actual study just consisted of finding articles off the internet from Medline, Embase, Ovid, Google Scholar and Cochrane database.