ArticleBMC surgery2025
The comparison of post-proximal gastrectomy digestive tract reconstruction methods.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
objectiveProximal gastrectomy (PG) is commonly used to remove proximal gastric cancer leading to gastroesophageal reflux and requires digestive tract reconstruction. This study is to compare the performance of esophagogastrostomy (EG), jejunal interposition (JI), and double tract reconstruction (DTR) on post-PG reconstruction effectiveness.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted using the clinical data of 94 PG patients who underwent digestive tract reconstruction by EG (37 patients), JI (29 patients) or DTR (28 patients). The safety of the reconstruction procedure and the incidence of surgical complications were evaluated using the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERD-Q) scale score, gastroscopy, barium meal examination of digestive tract, and 24-h pH monitoring.
resultsThe DTR group showed significantly lower GERD-Q scores (p < 0.05) and RSI scores (p < 0.05) compared to the EG and JI groups. This indicates that DTR is more effective in preventing reflux esophagitis. The pre- and post-surgical GERD-Q scores assessed by esophageal 24-h pH acidity measurements and Los Angeles Grading were reduced in all patient groups, with the DTR group showing better results than the other two (p < 0.05). The results of the EORTC QLQ-STO22 questionnaire indicated that the DTR group had a higher overall health status score than the other two groups (p < 0.001).
conclusionEG had a short surgical duration and less bleeding. JI reduced the prevalence of reflux esophagitis. DTR presented improved prevention of reflux esophagitis and enhanced quality of life.
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.