Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36658250›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023

Safety and Efficacy of OGT-Assisted Overlap Oesophagojejunostomy Versus the Traditional Overlap Method in Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction (G/GEJ) Tumours.

Xinhua Chen, Tian Lin, Mingli Zhao, Jia Yang, Huilin Huang, Liying Zhao, Hao Liu, Tao Chen, Hao Chen, Yanfeng Hu and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xinhua Chen *Department of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Tian Lin *Department of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Mingli Zhao *Department of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Jia Yang *Department of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Huilin HuangDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Liying ZhaoDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Hao LiuDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Tao ChenDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Hao ChenDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Yanfeng HuDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. yfenghu@qq.com.
Guoxin LiDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. gzliguoxin@163.com.
Jiang YuDepartment of General Surgery and Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumors, Nanfang Hospital, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. balbcyujiang@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7378-158X
Nanfang Hospital · CN

Funding

Clinical Research Program of Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University 2021CR001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOverlap guiding tube (OGT)-assisted overlap oesophagojejunostomy (EJS), which was first designed and reported by our team, has shown feasibility. However, its safety and efficiency have not yet been compared with the conventional overlap approach.

methodsWe retrospectively analysed the data of 155 gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy by conventional (conventional group, n = 83) or OGT-assisted (OGT group, n = 72) overlap methods at Nanfang Hospital. The anastomotic efficiency and surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

resultsThe success rate of inserting an anvil fork into the oesophageal lumen at the first attempt in the OGT group was much higher than in the conventional group (86.7% vs. 97.2%, P = 0.019). Consistently, the duration of EJS (P < 0.001) in the OGT group was significantly shorter than that in the conventional group. Operatively, there was one case in which oesophageal pseudocanals developed; another case was converted to thoracoscopic surgery in the conventional group, but there were no such cases in the OGT group. In terms of postoperative recovery, the OGT group was superior to the conventional group. The incidence of postoperative complications (28.9% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.247) and the classification of complication severity (P = 0.450) were milder in the OGT group, although the difference was not statistically significant. Notably, the conventional group had four cases (4.8%) of oesophagojejunal anastomotic leakage (EJAL) and one case (1.2%) of anastomotic stenosis. In the OGT group, two patients (2.8%) developed EJAL, but none developed anastomotic stenosis or anastomotic bleeding. Neither group had any cases of unplanned secondary surgery or perioperative deaths.

conclusionsThe OGT-assisted method reduced the surgical difficulty of overlap EJS with good safety. This study provides new perspectives for optimizing EJS.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyStomach NeoplasmsAnastomosis, SurgicalConstriction, PathologicEsophagogastric JunctionGastrectomyHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36658250
OpenAlexW4317438802

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.