Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41838074›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026

Gastric ischemic conditioning before esophagectomy: contemporary practices and insights from an international survey.

Alberto Aiolfi, Davide Bona, Andrea Sozzi, Yves Borbély, Luigi Bonavina, G. I. C. Collaborative Group

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Alberto AiolfiI.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi - Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Via C. Belgioioso, 173, 20157, Milan, Italy. alberto.aiolfi86@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7764-6075
Davide BonaI.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi - Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Via C. Belgioioso, 173, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Andrea SozziI.R.C.C.S. Ospedale Galeazzi - Sant'Ambrogio, Division of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, University of Milan, Via C. Belgioioso, 173, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Yves BorbélyDepartment of Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland.
Luigi BonavinaDepartment of Pharmacy, Health and Nutrition Sciences, Azienda Ospedaliera di Cosenza, Division of General and Foregut Surgery, University of Calabria, Cosenza, Italy.
G. I. C. Collaborative Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) before esophagectomy has been proposed to enhance the vascular submucosal network of the gastric conduit and perfusion at the anastomotic site. Its advantages remain controversial due to inconsistent literature findings, often attributed to heterogeneity in patient selection, targeted vessels, timing, and variations in GIC technique. We conducted a survey to assess contemporary surgical practices regarding GIC utilization prior to esophagectomy among expert foregut surgeons.

methodsA Google-based survey was conducted in accordance with the CHERRIES checklist, developed following an extensive literature review and directed towards expert foregut surgeons. The survey comprised 39 questions covering demographic data, professional experience, surgical modalities for esophagectomy, indications, timing, and technical aspects for GIC.

resultsOverall, 115 expert foregut surgeons participated in the survey (response rate 76.7%). Overall, 56.4% indicated that they do not perform GIC whereas 43.6% reported utilizing GIC before esophagectomy. Main reasons for not performing GIC included lack of supporting literature (57.1%) and no clear benefit in reducing AL rate (42.9%). Selective GIC use was most often based on celiac trunk stenosis or calcification (67.7%), history of coronary stenting/bypass (48.4%), and thoracic aorta calcification (41.9%). Overall, 59.6% of experts using GIC preferred laparoscopy while 40.4% favored embolization. Laparoscopy was preferred for cancer staging, jejunostomy formation, and hospital availability; embolization was preferred for its simplicity, avoidance of general anesthesia, absence of adhesions, and ability to dynamically assess the vascular anatomy intraprocedural. The left gastric artery was the most frequently targeted vessel (> 90%) for both laparoscopy and embolization, either individually or in combination with the short gastric vessels or the left gastroepiploic artery. Almost 70% of GIC users indicated a preference for performing GIC ≥ 14 days before esophagectomy.

conclusionsThe survey indicates that less than half of the experts support GIC prior to esophagectomy, preferring its selective application. Laparoscopy is preferred over embolization, likely due to better tumor staging and greater hospital availability. Most respondents also prefer GIC to be performed more than 14 days before esophagectomy.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyIschemic PreconditioningPractice Patterns, Physicians'Preoperative CareStomachHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesEmbolizationEsophagectomyIschemic conditioningLaparoscopySurvey

Identifiers

PMID41838074
PMCPMC13369694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.