ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2021
Management and outcomes of resectable gastric conduit cancer: a retrospective comparative study of 51 cases.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility of surgical resection for gastric cancer in the gastric conduit following esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Successful robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery for scirrhous gastric conduit cancer after esophagectomy: A case report.Oncology letters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough gastric conduit cancer (GCC) arising after esophagectomy is increasingly being reported, therapeutic strategies for resectable GCC have yet to be optimized. We investigated clinicopathological features of patients undergoing endoscopic versus more invasive surgical treatments for GCC and compared their outcomes.
methodsFifty-one patients, who had a history of esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction for esophageal cancer and underwent resection for metachronous GCC, were identified. Their characteristics and outcomes were retrospectively reviewed.
resultsThere were 48 males and three females, ranging in age from 46-86 years. Twelve patients underwent surgery for GCC (group S) and 39 underwent only endoscopic resection (group E). The most common cause of death was pneumonia (10/51, 19.6%). Neither overall survival nor cumulative incidence of pneumonia-caused death differed significantly between the two groups (P = 0.60, 0.84, respectively). In group S, partial gastrectomy was performed in four cases and total gastrectomy in seven. Partial resections, including three antrectomy without sternotomy or intrathoracic procedures, were completed with significantly shorter operative durations than total resections (median 208 vs 513 min, P = 0.012). GCC recurrence was experienced in two cases: one undergoing open approach partial resection of the corpus and the other thoracoscopic total gastrectomy.
conclusionEven compared with endoscopic treatment, outcomes following surgery for GCC appeared to be acceptable. Open approach total gastric gastrectomy could be the most radical modality, while other less invasive alternatives, e.g., antrectomy, are also an option. Clinicians may select a treatment strategy balancing radicality and patient status, reflecting tolerance to invasive procedures.
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.