ArticleMedicine2015
Delta-Shaped Gastroduodenostomy in Fully Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Digestive tract reconstruction options after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to explore the technical feasibility, safety, and clinical efficacy of delta-shaped anastomosis for digestive tract reconstruction during totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Clinical data of 24 patients who received totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with delta-shaped anastomosis (laparoscopic gastrectomy group, LG group) and 30 patients who received open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer (open gastrectomy group, OG group) from April 2013 to April 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative time to intestinal function recovery, postoperative pain, postoperative hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative complications (infection, obstruction, and delayed gastric emptying) were compared between these 2 groups. Patients in both groups were discharged without marked complications. No patients who initially selected laparoscopy were converted to laparotomy. Patients in the LG group had longer operation times (175.3 ± 64.7 minutes versus 120.1 ± 43.4 minutes, P < 0.05), lower intraoperative blood loss (50.8 ± 25.3 mL versus 95.6 ± 20.7 mL, P < 0.05), faster recovery of intestinal function (1.2 ± 0.5 days versus 2.6 ± 1.0 days, P < 0.05), less postoperative pain (5.6 ± 0.7 versus 9.5 ± 0.3, P < 0.05), and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (8.5 ± 2.2 days versus 12.2 ± 3.8 days, P < 0.05), compared with patients in the OG group. There were no significant differences with respect to surgical margins achieved, the number of lymph nodes retrieved or incidence of postoperative complications (infection, obstruction, and delayed gastric emptying) between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Laparoscopic reconstruction of the digestive tract through delta-shaped anastomosis appears to be safe, feasible, and associated to rapid recovery. These data argue for more wide-spread implementation of this procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.