Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28289510›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2017

Critical analysis of feeding jejunostomy following resection of upper gastrointestinal malignancies.

Andrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Rachel E Sargent, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Jejunostomy and Nasogastric Feeding in Minimally Invasive McKeown Esophagectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Feeding jejunostomy in upper gastrointestinal resections: a UK-wide survey.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew M BlakelyAndrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
Saad AjmalAndrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
Rachel E SargentAndrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
Thomas T NgAndrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
Thomas J MinerAndrew M Blakely, Saad Ajmal, Thomas T Ng, Thomas J Miner, Department of Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI 02903, United States.
Brown University · USCreative Research Enterprises (United States) · USProvidence College · USRhode Island Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess nutritional recovery, particularly regarding feeding jejunostomy tube (FJT) utilization, following upper gastrointestinal resection for malignancy.

methodsA retrospective review was performed of a prospectively-maintained database of adult patients who underwent esophagectomy or gastrectomy (subtotal or total) for cancer with curative intent, from January 2001 to June 2014. Patient demographics, the approach to esophagectomy, the extent of gastrectomy, FJT placement and utilization at discharge, administration of parenteral nutrition (PN), and complications were evaluated. All patients were followed for at least ninety days or until death.

resultsThe 287 patients underwent upper GI resection, comprised of 182 esophagectomy (

conclusionNutritional recovery following esophagectomy and gastrectomy is distinct. Operations are associated with unique complication profiles. Nutritional supplementation alternative to jejunostomy should be considered in particular scenarios.

Indexed as

EsophagectomyFeeding jejunostomyGastrectomyNutritional recoveryOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID28289510
PMCPMC5329704
OpenAlexW2589862347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.