ArticleJuntendo medical journal2025
A Comparative Clinical Analysis of Esophagogastrostomy Versus Double-Tract Reconstruction Following Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy.
Article in Juntendo medical journal, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with esophagogastrostomy (EG) and double-tract reconstruction (DTR) for early gastric cancer of the upper stomach is a function-preserving surgery that retains oncological curative capability. However, direct comprehensive comparative analyses on the clinical outcomes of EG and DTR as reconstructive techniques following LPG are lacking. Therefore, this study investigated the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of EG and DTR following LPG. Materials and Methods: A retrospective comparative analysis was conducted based on a dataset compiled from two institutions. LPG cases for gastric cancer meeting eligibility criteria were divided into an EG group and a DTR group, and clinicopathological characteristics, perioperative outcomes, nutritional status, 3-year overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were analyzed. Furthermore, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for complications following LPG. Result: Among the 1198 patients, 104 received LPG, of whom 49 underwent EG and 41 underwent DTR. The DTR was significantly more frequently selected in patients with advanced cancer, while no significant differences were found in the other preoperative clinical factors. No significant differences were observed in perioperative outcomes, including postoperative complications, nutritional parameters, 3-year OS, and CSS. Multivariate analysis identified cardiac disease as a risk factor for postoperative complications following LPG. Conclusion: Short- and long-term clinical outcomes following LPG are equivalent between EG and DTR. For gastric cancer patients with cardiac disease undergoing LPG, careful attention is required for perioperative management.
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.