SynthesisInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025
Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. 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.
- Bioresorbable acoustic patch for simultaneous sealing and early detection of gastric leakage.Science advances · 2026Article
- Reducing anastomotic complications with endoscopy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate outcomes of intracorporeal (IOJ) versus extracorporeal (EOJ) oesophagojejunostomy following laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for the treatment of gastric cancer.
methodsA comprehensive search of various electronic databases was conducted. Comparative studies of IOJ versus EOJ following LTG in patients with gastric malignancy were included. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak, anastomotic bleeding, and anastomotic stricture formation. Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS), volume of intra-operative haemorrhage, number of harvested lymph nodes, time to flatus, time to soft diet, intra-abdominal infection, pulmonary infection, surgical site infection (SSI), duodenal stump leak, pancreatic fistula occurrence, postoperative ileus, re-operation, and mortality. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using the random-effects model, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias.
resultsSeventeen non-randomised studies enrolling 2,960 patients divided between an IOJ ( n = 1430) and EOJ ( n = 1530) group were included. IOJ was associated with significantly lower risk of anastomotic stricture ( P = 0.01), volume of intra-operative bleeding ( P = < 0.001), and SSI (P = 0.04) compared to EOJ. No difference was found in anastomotic leak ( P = 0.93); anastomotic bleeding ( P = 0.35); operative time ( P = 0.63); LOS ( P = 0.30); lymph node yield ( P = 0.17); time to first flatus ( P = 0.77); time to resumption of soft diet ( P = 0.32); intra-abdominal infection ( P = 0.22); pulmonary infection ( P = 0.45); duodenal stump leak ( P = 0.46); pancreatic fistula occurrence ( P = 0.16); and paralytic ileus ( P = 0.59), re-operation ( P = 0.50), and mortality ( P = 0.23) between the two groups.
conclusionsLTG for gastric malignancy with IOJ may be associated with lower risk of anastomotic stricture and SSI compared to the extracorporeal approach. However, future adequately powered randomized studies are needed to compare the two techniques.
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.