ArticleJournal of gastric cancer2019
Feasibility of Linear-Shaped Gastroduodenostomy during the Performance of Totally Robotic Distal Gastrectomy.
Article in Journal of gastric cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough linear-shaped gastroduodenostomy (LSGD) was reported to be a feasible and reliable method of Billroth I anastomosis in patients undergoing totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG), the feasibility of LSGD for patients undergoing totally robotic distal gastrectomy (TRDG) has not been determined. This study compared the feasibility of LSGD in patients undergoing TRDG and TLDG. MATERIALS AND METHODS ALL C: onsecutive patients who underwent LSGD after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer between January 2009 and December 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to reduce the selection bias between TRDG and TLDG. Short-term outcomes, functional outcomes, learning curve, and risk factors for postoperative complications were analyzed.
resultsThis analysis included 414 patients, of whom 275 underwent laparoscopy and 139 underwent robotic surgery. PSM analysis showed that operation time was significantly longer (163.5 vs. 132.1 minutes, P<0.001) and postoperative hospital stay significantly shorter (6.2 vs. 7.5 days, P<0.003) in patients who underwent TRDG than in patients who underwent TLDG. Operation time was the independent risk factor for LSGD after intracorporeal gastroduodenostomy. Cumulative sum analysis showed no definitive turning point in the TRDG learning curve. Long-term endoscopic findings revealed similar results in the two groups, but bile reflux at 5 years showed significantly better improvement in the TLDG group than in the TRDG group (P=0.016).
conclusionsLSGD is feasible in TRDG, with short-term and long-term outcomes comparable to that in TLDG. LSGD may be a good option for intracorporeal Billroth I anastomosis in patients undergoing TRDG.
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.