ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
A Comparison of Different Types of Esophageal Reconstructions: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Positive Intraoperative Frozen Section during Surgery for Junctional and Gastric Cancer: Should We Re-Resect? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Surgical approaches to esophageal cancer gastrointestinal reconstruction: a systematic review of jejunum, colon, and ileocolonic interposition with comparative outcome analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Jejunal and colonic reconstruction after esophagectomy in difficult gastric conduit: a multicenter study and meta-analysis.Surgery today · 2026Pooled it
- Successful endoscopic drainage for gastropericardial fistula caused by a gastric conduit ulcer after esophagectomy.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Early Outcomes of Transhiatal Esophagectomy: Experience From an Oncology Center in Nepal.Cureus · 2026Article
- Nonsupercharged cervical Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy for esophageal reconstruction.JTCVS techniques · 2026Article
- Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure as a first-line treatment for post-esophagectomy anastomotic leaks: A paradigm shift in management.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Regenerative reconstruction of mature esophageal epithelium by engraftment of esophageal organoids in de-epithelialized mouse colon.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- Case Report: A large granular cell tumor of the cervical esophagus with single cell RNA sequencing analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- The Impact of EndoVAC in Addressing Post-Esophagectomy Anastomotic Leak in Esophageal Cancer Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Totally minimally invasive laparoscopic robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: improved technique and outcomes over 200 cases.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Salvage reconstruction of the esophagus using the left colon with microscopic supercharge following failed ileocolic reconstruction: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of wide and narrow gastric conduit in esophageal cancer surgery.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
- Esophageal replacement when stomach conduit is unavailable: is colon the best option?Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2023Article
- Additional superdrainage reduces anastomotic fistula and stenosis after gastric tube reconstruction with cervical anastomosis for esophageal cancer.JTCVS techniques · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA total esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction is the mainstream procedure for esophageal cancer. Colon interposition and free jejunal flap for esophageal reconstruction are the alternative choices when the gastric tube is not available. However, to date, a solution for the high anastomosis leakage rates among these three types of conduits has not been reported. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to investigate the rate of anastomotic leakage (AL) among the three procedures to determine the best esophageal substitute or the future direction for improving the conventional gastric pull-up (GPU).
methodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. We included esophageal cancer patients receiving esophagectomy and excluded patients with other cancer. The random effect model was used in this network meta-analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for the quality assessment of studies in the network meta-analysis, and funnel plots were used to evaluate publication bias. The primary outcome is anastomosis leakage; the secondary outcomes are stricture formation, length of hospital stays, and mortality rate.
resultsNine studies involving 1613 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. The trend results indicated the following. Regarding anastomosis leakage, free jejunal flap was the better procedure; regarding stricture formation, colon interposition was the better procedure; regarding mortality rate, free jejunal flap was the better procedure; regarding length of hospital stay, gastric pull-up was the better treatment. DISCUSSION: Overall, if technically accessible, free jejunal flap is a better choice than colon interposition when gastric conduit cannot be used, but further study should be conducted to compare groups with equal supercharged patients. In addition, jejunal flap (JF) cannot replace traditional gastric pull-up (GPU) due to technical complexities, more anastomotic sites, and longer operation times. However, the GPU method with the supercharged procedure would be a possible solution to lower postoperative AL. The limitation of this meta-analysis is that the number of articles included was low; we aim to update the result when new data are available.
fundingNone. REGISTRATION: N/A.
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.