Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37064085›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023

Clinical effect and follow-up of laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy for upper gastric carcinoma.

Wei Meng, Huang Ya-di, Cao Wei-Bo, Zhao Ru-Dong, Cheng Ze-Wei, Jun Ou Yang, Yan Ze-Peng, Chen Chuan-Qi, Liang Yi-Ze, Sun Dan-Ping and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Indocyanine green fluorescence-guided proximal margin identification in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: a randomized clinical trial.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wei MengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Huang Ya-diDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Cao Wei-BoDepartment of General Surgery, Weihai Second Hospital, Weihai, China.
Zhao Ru-DongDepartment of General Surgery, Yangxin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Yangxin, China.
Cheng Ze-WeiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Jun Ou YangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Yan Ze-PengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Chen Chuan-QiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Liang Yi-ZeDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Sun Dan-PingDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Yu Wen-BinDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Qilu Hospital of Shandong University · CNWeihai Maternal and Child Health Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the safety and clinical effect of tubular esophagogastric anastomosis in laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted involving 191 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from January 2017 to October 2020. Patients were divided into tubular esophagogastric anastomosis group (TG group) and traditional esophagogastric anastomosis group (EG group) according to the digestive tract reconstruction. Their intraoperative conditions, perioperative recovery and postoperative follow-up were compared. Patients were also divided into indocyanine green group and non-indocyanine green group according to whether or not indocyanine green tracer technology was used during the operation. Their intraoperative condition and perioperative recovery were compared and analyzed after propensity score matching. Results: The operation was successfully completed in all patients. Compared with the EG group, the TG group had less volume of gastric tube drainage, shorter gastric tube drainage time and proton pump inhibitors application time, and lower reuse rate of proton pump inhibitors. However, the TG group had a higher anastomotic stenosis at three months after surgery, as measured using anastomotic width and dysphagia score. Nevertheless, the incidence of reflux esophagitis and postoperative quality of life score in the TG group were lower compared with the EG group at 1st and 2nd year after surgery. In the indocyanine green analysis, the indocyanine green group had significantly shorter total operation time and lymph node dissection time and less intraoperative blood loss compared with the non-indocyanine green group. However, compared with the non-indocyanine green group, more postoperative lymph nodes were obtained in the indocyanine green group. Conclusion: Laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy is safe and effective treatment option for upper gastric cancer. Tubular esophagogastric anastomosis has more advantages in restoring postoperative gastrointestinal function and reducing reflux, but it has a higher incidence of postoperative anastomotic stenosis compared with traditional esophagogastrostomy. The application of indocyanine green tracer technique in laparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomy has positive significance.

Indexed as

indocyanine green tracer techniquelaparoscopic radical proximal gastrectomytraditional esophagogastrostomytubular esophagogastric anastomosisupper gastric carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID37064085
PMCPMC10090458
OpenAlexW4361296563

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.