ArticleJournal of minimally invasive surgery2026
Minimally invasive surgery for remnant gastric cancer: a single-center retrospective study of treatment outcomes in Japan.
Article in Journal of minimally invasive surgery, 2026. 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.
- A response to the letter regarding "Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2026Article
- Reassessing oncologic adequacy and methodological rigor in minimally invasive surgery for remnant gastric cancer.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Surgical resection of remnant gastric cancer (RGC) is technically challenging and difficult. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been adopted for various procedures, but reports of MIS for RGC remain limited. Herein, we report the surgical techniques and short-term outcomes of MIS for RGC. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 61 consecutive RGC patients who underwent open or minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) total gastrectomy for potentially curable RGC at our institution (January 1999-August 2025). A propensity score-matched cohort was used for an exploratory evaluation of the safety and efficacy of MIS for RGC, focusing on feasibility rather than superiority over open surgery. Results: Of these 61 patients, 53 underwent open surgery and eight underwent MIS gastrectomy for RGC. The median age was 70 years. The cohort comprised 53 men and eight women. The initial procedure was open surgery in 58 patients and MIS in three patients. Propensity score matching showed significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss in the MIS group compared with the open surgery group (39 mL vs. 576 mL, Conclusion: MIS, including robotic gastrectomy, is feasible and safe for RGC, with potential perioperative benefits requiring multicenter validation.
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.