ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2025
Advantages of subtotal gastrectomy for upper third gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 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.
- Postoperative quality of life and nutritional outcomes following subtotal, proximal, or distal gastrectomy for upper gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Advantages of subtotal gastrectomy for upper third gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Distal gastrectomy with very small remnant stomach (subtotal gastrectomy, STG) is sometimes performed for upper third gastric cancer, instead of total gastrectomy (TG). However, the advantages of STG over TG remain fully unknown, in terms of survival outcomes, complication rates, nutritional status, and quality of life. Therefore, a systematic review was performed in accordance with the preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension statement for reporting systematic reviews. Meta-analyses were performed regarding operation time, complication rates, body weight changes, and reflux esophagitis by using R software. Operation time was significantly shorter in STG than in TG (Mean difference: -20.79 [95% CI: -35.59 to -5.99]). We cannot conclude whether STG is better than TG in terms of survival because of inconsistency among reports. The total complication rates (≧ grade2 and 3) are significantly lower in STG than TG. Reflux esophagitis was lower in STG than in TG (0% vs. 7.7%), although the difference was not significant probably because of small sample size. Body weight change compared with preoperative value was significantly lower after STG than TG both at 6 and 12 months after the operation (6 months: mean difference -5.31% [95% CI: -6.95 to -3.67], 12 months: mean difference -6.13 [95% CI: -8.20 to -4.06]). We revealed that STG has its advantage on shorter operation time, less complication rates, and lower body weight loss by meta-analysis. Although there are some controversies, STG can be an ideal option for patients with gastric cancer of upper third stomach.
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.