ArticleBMC surgery2025
Favorable outcomes with jejunal interposition without vascular anastomosis for esophagectomy in cancer patients: a single-center experience.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surgical approaches to esophageal cancer gastrointestinal reconstruction: a systematic review of jejunum, colon, and ileocolonic interposition with comparative outcome analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
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
Abstract
backgroundThe standard esophageal replacement for esophageal cancer treatment is a gastric conduit. However, jejunal interposition is often utilized when the stomach is not available. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with this technique, particularly in cases not requiring microvascular anastomosis, and assess surgical outcomes.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of cancer patients who underwent jejunum interposition at our institution from 2003 to 2020. Data regarding patient characteristics, operative technique, and postoperative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Factors affecting oncologic outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox regression. Postoperative conduit function was assessed at 6 months.
resultsWith a median follow-up of 35 months, 122 patients (113 males and 9 females; aged 40 to 86 years) were included. Over half (54.9%, 67/122) had stage III or higher disease. Median operation time was 270 min, and the median drainage time was 8 days. Postoperative complications occurred in 28.7% of patients, with pulmonary infections being the most common. The anastomotic leakage rate was 4.1% (5/122), and the 90-day mortality rate was 5.7%. The overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 79.5%, 49.0%, and 35.6%, respectively. The prognosis was mainly correlated with tumor stage and most patients reported good quality of life.
conclusionOur findings suggests that, even without vascular anastomosis, jejunal conduit is a feasible procedure for reconstruction after esophagectomy, resulting in low morbidity and favorable prognosis.
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.