ArticleBMC cancer2024
Short-term outcomes and quality of life of esophagogastrostomy versus the double-tract reconstruction after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional Outcomes and Anti-Reflux Performance of Reconstruction Methods Following Proximal Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Age-dependent trade-offs between tubular esophagogastric and double-tract anastomosis after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy: a retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with esophagogastrostomy using overlap method combined with gastric remnant "U"-shaped fold: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- A modified double tract reconstruction with the NI method following proximal gastrectomy: a novel approach to prevent reflux and preserve nutritional status.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Double tract reconstruction in proximal gastric tumors: A systematic review of clinical and functional outcomes.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Current status, trends, and controversies in the selection of gastrectomy procedures: Insights from two nationwide questionnaire surveys conducted over a 7-year interval in Japan.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- Effect of double-tract reconstruction and laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy on immune function and stress.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Function Preserving Gastrectomy and Quality of Life.Journal of gastric cancer · 2025Review
- The impact of different gastrointestinal reconstruction techniques on gut microbiota after gastric cancer surgery.Frontiers in microbiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is no optimal reconstruction technique after proximal gastrectomy. The esophagogastrostomy (EG) is a rather simple procedure technically, but the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture are higher. While the double-tract reconstruction (DTR) can lessen postoperative reflux esophagitis, it is technically complex with a long operation time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of life (QoL) and short-term outcomes of the two reconstruction techniques.
methodsWe retrospectively collected consecutive patients with upper-third gastric adenocarcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) at our center between 2019 June and 2023 May. Patients who underwent laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with EG or DTR were included in this study. A comparison was made between the clinical and pathological characteristics of patients and their surgical parameters, postoperative complications, and its 1-year QoL in two groups. The QoL of the two groups was assessed by Visick grading, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-STO22 scales at 1 year after operation. The nutritional status of the two groups was evaluated by BMI, hemoglobin and serum albumin.
resultsAII the qualified patients were divided EG group (n = 63) and DTR group (n = 93). Compared to the DTR group, the blood loss volume of EG group was more (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in operation duration, number of lymph nodes dissected, and postoperative length of stay between the two groups(p > 0.05). No statistical differences were observed in terms of the incidence of early complications and Clavien-Dindo classification as well(p > 0.05). After one year, the Visick grade of the DTR group was better than EG group (p = 0.040). The multivariable logistic regression analysis showed the only independent risk factor for reflux esophagitis was the reconstruction method. According to the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, patients in the DTR group had a better global health status(p = 0.001) and complained less about nausea and vomiting(p = 0.033), and appetite loss (p = 0.022). Patients in the DTR group complained less about reflux (p = 0.030) based on the EORTC QLQ-STO22 questionnaire. The multiple linear regression analysis revealed that the reconstruction method, reflux esophagitis and age had a linear relationship with the global health status score. Regarding nutritional status, BMI of the two groups both decreased 1 year after operation, and BMI decline value of the DTR group was lower than EG group (p = 0.001). There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups as for postoperative change in hemoglobin and serum albumin.
conclusionOur findings suggest that it is possible for skilled surgeons to achieve minimal blood loss volume without significantly increasing operation duration when performing DRT, which does not raise risk. In terms of anti-reflux, postoperative QoL and BMI maintenance, 1-year postoperative follow-up outcomes reveal the DTR is superior to EG, which deserve further research and promotion.
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.