ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2022
Disparities in Utilization and Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Techniques for Gastric Cancer Surgery in the United States.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating safety and quality of robotic-assisted gastric cancer surgery: meta-analysis and meta-regression.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Learning curve of laparoscopic and robotic total gastrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgery today · 2024Pooled it
- Disparities in access to and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Rates of Minimally Invasive Surgery After Introduction of Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Common General Surgery Operations.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Presentation, Treatment, and Survival Among Asians With Gastric Cancer.The Journal of surgical research · 2024Article
- Article
- TREATMENT OF GASTRIC CANCER ACCORDING TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THE HOSPITAL ONCOLOGY UNIT: ANALYSIS OF 33,774 PATIENTS OVER TWO DECADES.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic compared to open approach for distal gastrectomy may reduce pneumonia risk for patients with gastric cancer.Surgery open science · 2023Article
- Surgical considerations and outcomes of minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer resection.Cancer · 2022Review
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
backgroundThis study investigated national implementation patterns and perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) in gastric cancer surgery in the United States.
methodsThe National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for patients who underwent elective gastrectomy for gastric cancer from 2008-2018. The MIG versus open gastrectomy approach was correlated with hospital factors, patient characteristics, and complications.
resultsThere was more than a fivefold increase in MIG from 5.8% in 2008 to 32.9% in 2018 (nptrend < 0.001). Patients undergoing MIG had a lower Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (p = 0.001). On risk adjusted analysis, black patients (AOR = 0.77, p = 0.024) and patients with income below 25
conclusionsIn this national retrospective study, we observe socioeconomic differences in patients undergoing MIG, which is explained by hospital level factors in MIG utilization. We demonstrate that MIG is associated with a lower mortality compared with open gastrectomy. Establishing MIG as a safe approach to gastric cancers and understanding regional differences in implementation patterns can inform delivery of equitable high-quality health care.
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.