ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Size-dependent differences in the proximal remnant stomach: how much does a small remnant stomach after subtotal gastrectomy work?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conduit size and the risk of delayed gastric conduit emptying after esophagectomy.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Uncut Roux-en-Y for very small remnant stomach in gastric cancer: surgical advantages and nutritional outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Review
- Cardia function-preserving surgery and anti-reflux anastomotic method after proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current status and future perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Current status of function-preserving gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2021Review
- Long-term effect of simplified dietary education on the nutritional status of patients after a gastrectomy.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe application of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LsTG) in the management of early gastric cancer located in the upper third of the stomach creates an extremely small remnant stomach (SRS). However, it is unclear whether retaining such an SRS improves patients' postoperative outcomes in a similar manner to a conventional remnant stomach (CRS).
methodsFour hundred and nine of 878 patients undergoing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) between 2006 and 2012 underwent Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Among them, we selected 73 patients who underwent LsTG with an SRS (SRS group), and 83 patients with the tumor in the lower third of the stomach who underwent LDG with a CRS (CRS group). The surgical outcomes at 1 and 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years after gastrectomy were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two groups.
resultsOne year after gastrectomy, the postoperative:preoperative bodyweight ratio of the SRS group was 2% lower than that of the CRS group. Both groups had comparable total protein and albumin levels, and incidence of reflux esophagitis; however, hemoglobin was lower in the SRS group. This difference in hemoglobin level between the SRS and CRS groups became larger over time, although the total protein and albumin levels of the two groups remained similar.
conclusionAn SRS slightly decreases bodyweight and hemoglobin level compared with a CRS. Several objective outcomes of the SRS group are almost equal to those of the CRS group, which suggests LsTG is worth performing even though its remnant stomach is very small.
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.