SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2024
A comparison of the postoperative outcomes between intraoperative leak testing and no intraoperative leak testing for gastric cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing anastomotic complications with endoscopy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Intraoperative endoscopy: A controversial tool or a necessity in modern esophagogastric surgery?World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- [Modern approaches and technologies to prevent anastomotic leakage in the gastrointestinal tract].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPostoperative anastomotic leakage (PAL) is a serious complication of gastric cancer surgery. Although perioperative management has made considerable progress, anastomotic leakage (AL) cannot always be avoided. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether intraoperative leak testing (IOLT) can reduce the incidence of PAL and other postoperative outcomes in gastric cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this meta-analysis, we searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for clinical trials to assess the application of IOLT in gastric cancer surgery. All patients underwent laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer surgery. Studies comparing the postoperative outcomes of IOLT and no intraoperative leak testing (NIOLT) were included. Quality assessment, heterogeneity, risk of bias, and the level of evidence of the included studies were evaluated. PAL, anastomotic-related complications, 30-day mortality, and reoperation rates were compared between the IOLT and NIOLT group.
resultsOur literature search returned 721 results, from which six trials (a total of 1,666 patients) were included in our meta-analysis. Statistical heterogeneity was low. The primary outcome was PAL. IOLT reduced the incidence of PAL [2.09% vs 6.68%; (RR = 0.31, 95% Cl 0.19-0.53, P < 0.0001]. Anastomotic-related complications, which included bleeding, leakage, and stricture, were significantly higher in the NIOLT group than in the IOLT group [3.24% VS 10.85%; RR = 0.30, 95% Cl 0.18-0.53, P < 0.0001]. Moreover, IOLT was associated with lower reoperation rates [0.94% vs 6.83%; RR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.07-0.43, P = 0.0002].
conclusionConsidering the observed lower incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage (PAL), anastomotic-related complications, and reoperation rates, IOLT appears to be a promising option for gastric cancer surgery. It warrants further study before potential inclusion in future clinical guidelines.
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.