ArticleJournal of surgical oncology2025
Complications Following Open Versus Minimally Invasive Resection of Gastric Adenocarcinoma.
Article in Journal of surgical oncology, 2025. 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 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Combined imaging and serum biomarkers in CEUS-guided microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Versus Open Total and Distal Gastrectomy After Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer: A Nationwide Observational Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Thoracic Epidural Analgesia in Major Cancer Surgery: An Update.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesGastric adenocarcinoma (GA) is commonly treated with open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The preferred surgical approach remains unclear. This study sought to assess utilization over time, compare complication rates by surgical approach, and identify predictors of experiencing complications.
methodsPatients who underwent GA resection from 2016 to 2022 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and compared based on receipt of open gastrectomy versus MIS. Complication rates were compared with χ
resultsOut of 4,429 patients, most underwent open gastrectomy versus MIS (84.2% vs. 15.9%). MIS uptake did not increase. Open gastrectomy patients experienced more major complications (18.5% vs. 13.1%), higher perioperative mortality (1.53% vs. 0.57%), and longer hospital stays (7 vs. 5 days) compared to MIS patients (all p values < 0.01). MIS patients had a decreased risk of experiencing any complications (RR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.5-0.8). Non-white patients were less likely to receive MIS.
conclusionsMIS is associated with a decreased risk of experiencing complications compared to open gastrectomy for GA, yet its utilization has plateaued. Sociodemographic predictors of receipt of MIS indicate potential disparities in accessing certain treatments. SUMMARY: The preferred surgical approach for gastric cancer is unclear. This analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program compared complication rates of open gastrectomy with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). MIS was associated with a decreased risk of experiencing complications, yet utilization has plateaued.
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.