ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2021
Comparison of the outcomes between total eversion and conventional triangulating stapling technique in cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early Postoperative Serum Lactate Levels Predict Anastomotic Leakage After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- The totally mechanical Collard technique for cervical esophagogastric anastomosis reduces anastomotic stricture compared with triangular anastomosis in minimally invasive esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction through the retrosternal route: a propensity score-matched study.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- Application of reversely connecting circular stapler technique in cervical esophagogastric anastomosis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Which Anastomotic Techniques Is the Best Choice for Cervical Esophagogastric Anastomosis in Esophagectomy? A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Review
- Is Prophylactic Cervical Drainage Effective in Patients Undergoing McKeown Esophagectomy Reconstructed Through the Retrosternal Route with Two-Field Lymphadenectomy?World journal of surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnastomotic leakage and stenosis remain major problems after esophageal reconstruction. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes between the total eversion (TE) triangulating stapling technique (TST) and conventional (C) TST.
methodsThe study included 404 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent cervical esophagogastrostomy by TST between January 2013 and December 2018. The postoperative outcomes were compared between TE-TST and C-TST using propensity score-matched analysis.
resultsBefore matching, the cT stage and the cTNM stage were different between the groups. After matching, each group consisted of 128 patients. The patients' background characteristics were similar between the groups. Although the incidence of anastomotic leakage was similar between the groups (p = 0.216), anastomotic stricture occurred in 19 (14.8%) and 7 (5.5%) patients in the C-TST and the TE-TST groups, respectively (p = 0.021).
conclusionsThe incidence of anastomotic stenosis was significantly lower in the TE-TST group than in the C-TST group. TE-TST decreases the incidence of anastomotic stricture and can improve the quality of life in patients undergoing esophagectomy.
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.