Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38960887›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastric cancer2024

Characteristics of Metachronous Remnant Gastric Cancer After Proximal Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Analysis.

Kenichi Ishizu, Tsutomu Hayashi, Rei Ogawa, Masashi Nishino, Ryota Sakon, Takeyuki Wada, Sho Otsuki, Yukinori Yamagata, Hitoshi Katai, Yoshiyuki Matsui and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastric cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Management challenges and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in remnant gastric cancer: an analysis of 313 patients from the KEGG multicenter observational study.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Kenichi IshizuDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0009-0003-2694-8182
Tsutomu HayashiDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-9193-8269
Rei OgawaDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Masashi NishinoDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Ryota SakonDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeyuki WadaDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Sho OtsukiDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yukinori YamagataDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2624-1251
Hitoshi KataiDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-1547-8421
Yoshiyuki MatsuiCancer Medicine, Cooperative Graduate School, Jikei University Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takaki YoshikawaDepartment of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. tayoshik@ncc.go.jp.ORCID 0000-0003-1936-9484

Funding

Jikei University School of Medicine
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite annual endoscopy, patients with metachronous remnant gastric cancer (MRGC) following proximal gastrectomy (PG) are at times ineligible for endoscopic resection (ER). This study aimed to clarify the clinical risk factors for ER inapplicability. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe reviewed the records of 203 patients who underwent PG for cT1 gastric cancer between 2006 and 2015. The remnant stomach was categorized as a pseudofornix, corpus, or antrum.

resultsThirty-two MRGCs were identified in the 29 patients. Twenty MRGCs were classified as ER (ER group, 62.5%), whereas 12 were not (non-ER group, 37.5%). MRGCs were located in the pseudo-fornix in 1, corpus in 5, and antrum in 14 in the ER group, and in the pseudo-fornix in 6, corpus in 4, and antrum in 2 in the non-ER group (P=0.019). Multivariate analysis revealed that the pseudo-fornix was an independent risk factor for non-ER (P=0.014). In the non-ER group, MRGCs at the pseudo-fornix (n=6) had more frequent undifferentiated-type histology (4/6 vs. 0/6), deeper (≥pT1b2; 6/6 vs. 2/6) and nodal metastasis (3/6 vs. 0/6) than non-pseudo-fornix lesions (n=6). We examined the visibility of the region developing MRGC on an annual follow-up endoscopy one year before MRGC detection. In seven lesions at the pseudofornix, visibility was only secured in two (28.6%) because of food residues. Of the 25 lesions in the non-pseudo-fornix, visibility was secured in 21 lesions (84%; P=0.010).

conclusionsEndoscopic visibility increases the chances of ER applicability. Special preparation is required to ensure the complete clearance of food residues in the pseudo-fornix.

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastric StumpNeoplasms, Second PrimaryStomach NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsGastrectomyGastric cancerGastric remnantGastrointestinal endoscopyMetachronous neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID38960887
PMCPMC11224721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.