ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Esophagogastrostomy
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The comparison of post-proximal gastrectomy digestive tract reconstruction methods.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Short- and Long-term Outcomes After LaparoscopicCancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimThe optimal reconstruction method for laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) remains controversial. The present study aimed to compare short-term outcomes, including assessment of nutritional parameters and skeletal muscle, between two different methods, double-tract reconstruction (DTR) versus esophagogastrostomy (EG). PATIENTS AND
methodsData from patients who underwent LPG for gastric tumor(s) between 2018 and 2021, were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two group: DTR (n=11) and EG (n=17). Since 2020, the authors have applied the modified side overlap with fundoplication by Yamashita (mSOFY) method as the EG technique.
resultsCompared with DTR, EG was associated with a shorter reconstruction time (p=0.003). Complications of grade ≥3 occurred only in the EG group [n=4 (23.5%)] and the incidence of abnormal endoscopic findings after surgery was numerically higher in the EG group (n=2 vs. n=9; p=0.047). Across virtually all data points on the line graph, the EG group exhibited greater changes in post-discharge nutritional parameters, with Skeletal Muscle Index also demonstrating significant superiority (0.83 vs. 0.89; p=0.045).
conclusionAmong reconstruction methods for LPG, EG demonstrated superiority over DTR in preserving nutritional parameters and skeletal muscle mass. However, further research, including larger cohorts and longer-term follow-up, is necessary to validate this finding.
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.