ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery2026
Strategy of reduced port gastrostomy as a safe procedure for paediatric patients.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundLaparoscopic gastrostomy has improved surgical and cosmetic outcomes. Our approach involves a strategy of reduced port surgery, wherein only the umbilicus and tube insertion site were incised, with an additional port inserted if manipulation is difficult. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of our reduced port gastrostomy strategy. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe paediatric patients who underwent gastrostomy at our institution from July 2013 to March 2023 were reviewed retrospectively. Surgical outcomes were compared between patients who underwent reduced port gastrostomy and those who underwent multiport gastrostomy with or without fundoplication.
resultsOf the 78 patients who underwent gastrostomy, 25 and 39 patients who underwent reduced port gastrostomy and multiport gastrostomy with or without fundoplication, respectively, were included. Five patients who underwent reduced port gastrostomy required an additional port. The operative time during gastrostomy was shorter in the multiport gastrostomy group (21.3 min vs. 17.2 min, P = 0.00). One splenic injury in the reduced port gastrostomy group and one split of the stomach in the multiport gastrostomy group occurred and were completely repaired intraoperatively. No patient required reoperation within 30 days after gastrostomy. Post-operative complications, such as infection with pus (1 vs. 2, P = 1.00), external leakage requiring nutritional management change or tube replacement (2 vs. 2, P = 0.64) and tube dislodgement (1 vs. 0, P = 0.39), were similar between the two groups.
conclusionsThe strategy of reduced port gastrostomy was safe and cosmetically favourable compared with multiport gastrostomy.
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.