ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Utility of gastrostomy tube placement at the time of pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning curve of Robotic Assisted Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAMIE): initial experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study is to investigate the utility of gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement in reducing delayed gastric emptying (DGE) among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients undergoing PD from 2015 to 2020 at our institution. Thirty-day patient outcomes including DGE, length of stay (LOS), reoperation rates, and morbidity were analyzed in patients with or without G-tube placement.
results128 patients with resectable pancreatic head cancer (54 females, median age 68.50 [59.00-74.00]) underwent PD (66 had G-tube placement and 62 did not). There was no significant difference in the incidence of DGE (n = 17 vs. n = 17, p = 0.612), and LOS between the groups. Postoperative ileus (p = 0.007) was significantly lower while atrial fibrillation (p = 0.037) was higher among the G-tube group. Gastrostomy-related complications (p = 0.001) developed in ten patients: skin-related complications (n = 6), tube dislodgement (n = 3) and clogging (n = 1). Nine patients required reoperation during index admission (n = 4 vs. n = 5, p = 1.000). There was no difference in 30-day readmissions (n = 7 vs. n = 5, p = 0.471) and no difference in 30 or 90-day mortality.
conclusionGastrostomy tube placement during index PD did not affect the incidence of DGE. However, patients experienced significant morbidities due to G-tube-related complications. Placement of gastrostomy tubes at the index PD offers no clinical benefits.
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.