ArticleJournal of gastric cancer2021
Evaluation of Reduced Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy Performed by a Novice Surgeon.
Article in Journal of gastric cancer, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of textbook outcomes and postoperative pain trajectories between reduced-port and conventional robotic distal gastrectomy: a cumulative sum (CUSUM)-adjusted propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Single-port robotic gastrectomy in gastric cancer: a narrative review on the state of the art and outlook.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2026Review
- Comparison of Reduced Port Gastrectomy and Multiport Gastrectomy in Korea: Ad Hoc Analysis and Nationwide Survey on Gastric Cancer 2019.Journal of gastric cancer · 2025Article
- The Impact of Overweight and Obesity on Reduced-Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of a Single-Institution Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Current Status and Trends of Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy in Korea.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeReduced port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (RPLDG) using 3 ports is less invasive than conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (CLDG) using 5 ports. Although RPLDG performed by expert surgeons is safe and feasible, novice surgeons have difficulty performing this procedure. This study evaluated the surgical outcomes and feasibility of RPLDG performed by a novice surgeon. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe records of 136 patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer performed by a single novice surgeon between May 2016 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Among these 136 patients, 52 underwent RPLDG and 84 underwent CLDG. The clinicopathological characteristics, operative outcomes, and short-term postoperative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared.
resultsThe percentage of women was significantly higher in the RPLDG group than in the CLDG group (48.1% vs. 31%; P=0.045), but other baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the groups. Billroth II anastomosis was performed significantly more frequent (90.4% vs. 73.8%, P=0.015) and operation time was significantly shorter (207.1±43.3 min vs. 225.5±44.6 min, P=0.020) in the RPLDG group than in the CLDG group. The time to first flatus, postoperative pain score, length of postoperative hospital stay, and incidence and severity of complications did not differ significantly between the groups. Analysis of the learning curve based on the operation time showed that performing RPLDG on 20-30 patients was required to achieve technical proficiency.
conclusionsRPLDG is a safe and feasible surgical procedure for the treatment of gastric cancer, even when performed by a novice surgeon.
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.