SynthesisUpdates in surgery2026
Comparison of postoperative reflux esophagitis in different digestive tract reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer patients: a network meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Updates in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReflux esophagitis (RE) is an important complication after proximal gastrectomy (PG) among proximal gastric cancer (PGC) patients. In recent years, different digestive reconstruction methods have been used to reduce the risk of RE.
objectiveTo present and synthesize the clinical trial evidence regarding the postoperative RE associated with different digestive tract reconstruction methods following PG in patients with PGC.
methodsWe conducted an electronic literature search on PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), and Embase from the time of establishment of the database to February 14, 2025. Two independent reviewers screened studies that adhered to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main outcome was the incidence of postoperative RE after PG among PG patients, which was analyzed by network meta-analysis with a consistency model. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Cochrane Collaboration's tool were used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Heterogeneity and inconsistency analysis to evaluate the robustness of the results.
results30 studies involving 2,411 PGC patients were included in the analysis. The average incidence rates were as follows: DFT: 0.04, JI: 0.06, DTR: 0.08, JPI: 0.12, GT: 0.14, and EG: 0.24. DFT was associated with a lower risk of postoperative RE compared to EG (0.08 [0.02-0.27]). DTR also showed a lower risk of postoperative RE compared to EG (0.18 [0.10-0.36]). Conversely, EG had a higher risk of postoperative RE compared to JI (4.83 [2.33-10.06]). Possible rankings for reducing the incidence of RE were as follows: DFT > DTR>JI > JPI > GT > EG. Inconsistencies were noted between DTR and EG. However, the direct, indirect, and consistent effects all exhibited the same directional trend. Heterogeneity was identified in comparisons between EG vs GT and GT vs DFT (I
conclusionDFT, DTR, and JI had a significantly lower risk of postoperative RE compared with EG. To prevent postoperative RE, DFT was the best, DTR second best.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40770150What 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.