Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36163378›Full record

SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022

Are intra-operative gastric drainage procedures necessary in esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Edward J Nevins, Igor Maleyko, Steven Terence Roy Brown, Mohamed Nauzan Mohamed Nazeer, Andrea Sangheli, Alexander W Phillips

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Edward J NevinsDepartment of General Surgery, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, TS4 3BW, Middlesbrough, UK. dr.e.nevins@gmail.com.
Igor MaleykoDepartment of General Surgery, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, TS4 3BW, Middlesbrough, UK.
Steven Terence Roy BrownDepartment of General Surgery, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, TS4 3BW, Middlesbrough, UK.
Mohamed Nauzan Mohamed NazeerDepartment of General Surgery, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, TS4 3BW, Middlesbrough, UK.
Andrea SangheliDepartment of General Surgery, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, TS4 3BW, Middlesbrough, UK.
Alexander W PhillipsNorthern Oesophagogastric Unit, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Victoria Infirmary · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSurgical pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy are often performed during esophagectomy with a view of improving gastric conduit drainage. However, the clinical importance of this is not clear, and some centers opt to omit this step. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, mortality, delayed gastric emptying, and the need for further pyloric intervention, in patients undergoing esophagectomy with and without a drainage procedure.

methodsA database search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify randomized control trials and cohort studies published between 2000 and 2020 which compared outcomes of esophagectomy with and without drainage procedures. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to compare the rates of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, mortality, delayed gastric emptying, and the need for further pyloric intervention.

resultsThree randomized and 12 non-randomized publications were identified, comprising a total of 2339 patients. No significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to pulmonary complications (RR 1.02 [95% CI, 0.78-1.33], p = 0.91), anastomotic leak (RR 1.14 [95% CI, 0.80-1.62], p = 0.48), mortality (RR 0.53 [95% CI, 0.23-1.26], p = 0.15), delayed gastric emptying (RR 0.98 [95% CI, 0.59-1.62], p = 0.93), and the need for further pyloric intervention (RR 1.99 [95% CI, 0.56-7.08], p = 0.29).

conclusionWhere post-operative pyloric treatment is available on demand, surgical pyloric drainage procedures may not have any significant clinical impact on patient outcomes for patients undergoing esophagectomy, though further good-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this.

Indexed as

EsophagectomyGastroparesisAnastomotic LeakDrainageHumansPylorusEsophagectomyMeta-analysisPyloric drainagePyloromyotomyPyloroplasty

Identifiers

PMID36163378
OpenAlexW4297254479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.