ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2025
Safety and efficacy of pancreaticogastrostomy for hepatopancreatoduodenectomy compared to pancreaticojejunostomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reassessing the Role of Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-Analysis of Modern Case Series.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatopancreatoduodenectomy (HPD) is one of the most challenging surgeries for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a critical and fatal complication. The safety and efficacy of pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) for HPD compared to pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate and compare the short-term outcomes of PG and PJ for HPD in terms of the POPF rate.
methodsTwo groups of patients (PG group vs. PJ group) were retrospectively compared between January 2013 and January 2024. The reconstruction method was changed from PJ to PG in March 2021.
resultsA total of 50 patients were enrolled in this study. The PG and PJ groups comprised 15 (30.0%) and 35 (70.0%) patients, respectively. In the PJ group, three (8.6%) patients died after surgery because of clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF), intraabdominal bleeding, and post-hepatectomy liver failure. The operative time was longer in the PG group (909 min vs. 706 min, P = 0.020); however, the CR-POPF rate was lower in the PG group than in the PJ group (0 [0%] vs. 19 [54.3%], P < 0.001). Moreover, the number of patients who developed massive postoperative ascites (≥ 1,500 mL/day) was lower in the PG group than in the PJ group (3 [20.0%] vs. 16 [45.7%] patients, P = 0.028).
conclusionsChanging the method of pancreatic reconstruction for HPD from PJ to PG improved the short-term outcomes of patients at our institution. PG reconstruction is safe and effective for HPD as it reduces the incidence of CR-POPF.
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.