Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38607505›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024

Study of Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes Between Esophagogastrostomy and Double-Tract Reconstruction After Proximal Gastrectomy.

Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Naoshi Kubo, Katsunobu Sakurai, Junya Nishimura, Yasuhito Iseki, Takafumi Nishii, Sadatoshi Shimizu, Toru Inoue, Yukio Nishiguchi, Kiyoshi Maeda

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tsuyoshi HasegawaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan. gdhfm399@yahoo.co.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7094-0263
Naoshi KuboDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Katsunobu SakuraiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Junya NishimuraDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Yasuhito IsekiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Takafumi NishiiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Sadatoshi ShimizuDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Toru InoueDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Yukio NishiguchiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Kiyoshi MaedaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka Metropolitan University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan.
Osaka City General Hospital · JPOsaka Metropolitan University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the opportunities for proximal gastrectomy (PG) for early gastric cancer in the upper third stomach have been increasing, the safety and feasibility of PG have been a great concern in recent years. This study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between patients who underwent esophagogastrostomy (EG) and those who underwent double-tract reconstruction (DTR) after PG.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 34 patients who underwent EG and 39 who underwent DTR at our hospital between 2011 and 2022. We compared the procedure data and postoperative complications including anastomotic complications within 1 year after surgery as short-term outcomes and the rates of change in nutritional status, skeletal muscle mass, and 3-year survival as long-term outcomes.

resultsAlthough operation time of the DTR group was significantly longer than that of the EG group, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications between 2 groups. Regarding the endoscopic findings, the incidence of anastomotic stenosis and reflux esophagitis was significantly higher in the EG group than in the DTR group (26.5% vs 0%, p < 0.001; 15.2% vs 0%, p = 0.020). In long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in body weight, BMI, laboratory data, and skeletal muscle mass index between 2 groups for 3 years. The 3-year overall survival rates of 2 groups were similar.

conclusionDTR after PG could prevent the occurrence of anastomotic complications in comparison to EG. The long-term outcomes were similar between these 2 types of reconstruction.

Indexed as

GastrectomyPlastic Surgery ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsStomach NeoplasmsAgedAnastomosis, SurgicalFemaleGastrostomyHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeDouble-tract reconstructionEsophagogastrostomyLong-term outcomesProximal gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID38607505
OpenAlexW4394762932

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.