Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37498484›Full record

SynthesisUpdates in surgery2023

Effect of gastric ischemic conditioning prior to esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alberto Aiolfi, Davide Bona, Gianluca Bonitta, Luigi Bonavina, Gastric Ischemic Conditioning (GIC) International Collaborative Group

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alberto AiolfiI.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Via C. Belgioioso, 173, 20157, Milan, Italy. alberto.aiolfi86@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7764-6075
Davide BonaI.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Via C. Belgioioso, 173, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Gianluca BonittaI.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Via C. Belgioioso, 173, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Luigi BonavinaIRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Division of General and Foregut Surgery, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Gastric Ischemic Conditioning (GIC) International Collaborative Group
University of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ischemia at the anastomotic site is thought to be a protagonist in the development of anastomosis-related complications while different strategies to overcome this problem have been reported. Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) prior to esophagectomy has been described with this intent. Evaluate the effect of GIC on anastomotic complications after esophagectomy. Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed were investigated up to March 31st, 2023. We considered articles that appraised short-term outcomes after GIC vs. no GIC in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Anastomotic leak (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), and gastric conduit necrosis (GCN) were primary outcomes. Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were used to calculate related inference. Fourteen studies (1760 patients) were included. Of those, 732 (41.6%) underwent GIC, while 1028 (58.4%) underwent one-step esophagectomy. Compared with no GIC, GIC was related to a reduced RR for AL (R RR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.86; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.29-0.91; p = 0.02), whereas no differences were found for GCN (RR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.19-1.61; p = 0.28). Postoperative pneumonia (RR = 1.09; p = 0.99), overall complications (RR = 0.87; p = 0.19), operative time (SMD - 0.58; p = 0.07), hospital stay (SMD 0.66; p = 0.09), and 30-day mortality (RR = 0.69; p = 0.22) were comparable. GIC prior to esophagectomy seems associated with a reduced risk for AL and AS. Further studies are necessary to identify the subset of patients who can benefit from this procedure, the optimal technique, and the timing of GIC prior to esophagectomy.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyAnastomosis, SurgicalAnastomotic LeakHumansIschemiaPostoperative ComplicationsStomachEmbolizationEsophagectomyIschemic conditioningLaparoscopyOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID37498484
OpenAlexW4385294550

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.