Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30756163›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2019

Revisiting Laparoscopic Reconstruction for Billroth 1 Versus Billroth 2 Versus Roux-en-Y After Distal Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in the Modern Era.

Min Seo Kim, Yeongkeun Kwon, Eun Pyung Park, Liang An, Haeyeon Park, Sungsoo Park

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Propensity-score-matched analysis of a multi-institutional dataset to compare postoperative complications between Billroth I and Roux-en-Y reconstructions after distal gastrectomy.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2020
    Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Min Seo KimDivision of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea.
Yeongkeun KwonDepartment of Family Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Eun Pyung ParkDivision of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea.
Liang AnDivision of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea.
Haeyeon ParkDivision of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea.
Sungsoo ParkDivision of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea. kugspss@korea.ac.kr.ORCID 0000-0002-1779-8683
Korea University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this modern era, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) has largely replaced open distal gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer; however, a quantitative review of reconstruction methods applied exclusively using LDG has not yet been published. Thereafter, we compared three reconstruction methods (Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en Y) using the data derived solely from LDG patients.

methodsA systematic search was conducted using electronic bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase), for articles that compared reconstruction methods in LDG, published within the last decade. A systematic review comparing 12 outcome parameters and sensitivity analyses were performed to increase the statistical power and minimize the inconsistency and heterogeneity of results.

resultsTwenty-three clinical trials involving 5797 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the postoperative recovery and intraoperative parameters, except for operation time. B1 demonstrated a significantly shorter operation time when compared with B2 and RY by 21.6 min (P < 0.0001) and 44.69 min (P < 0.0001), respectively. In terms of postoperative endoscopic symptoms, RY was significantly superior to B1 and B2 for bile reflux (P < 0.001) and remnant gastritis (P < 0.001). For postoperative complications, B1 showed a significantly lower rate of postoperative morbidity than did RY and B2 (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0005, respectively).

conclusionsOur study is the first meta-analysis comparing anastomoses in LDG and introduces novel criteria for consideration when selecting reconstructions in LDG. Considering the significant differences in postoperative complications and endoscopic symptoms, these two parameters lay reasonable groundwork for guiding the surgeon's choice of reconstruction.

Indexed as

Anastomosis, Roux-en-YLaparoscopyGastrectomyGastroenterostomyHumansOperative TimePostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID30756163
OpenAlexW2913325147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.