Observational studyBMC gastroenterology2026
Comparison of surgical safety among different comprehensive treatment models for adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: a single-center cohort study.
Observational study in BMC gastroenterology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) are increasingly used to treat adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). However, there is insufficient clinical evidence to compare surgical safety among the three comprehensive treatment models, including the surgery‑first model, NAC model, and nCRT model. Therefore, this study was designed to compare surgical safety of the three comprehensive treatment models.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study. From January 2012 to December 2018, 276 consecutive patients with Siewert II and III AEG (cT2-4NxM0) in the Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute were enrolled in this study. All these patients underwent surgery and were categorized into three groups: surgery‑first group, NAC group and nCRT group. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to balance baseline characteristics between the three groups.
resultsThe overall postoperative complication rate in nCRT groups was 59.6%, which was significantly higher than that in the surgery-first group (42.2%, P = 0.040) and the NAC group (39.3%, P = 0.027). Moreover, the rate of major postoperative complications differed significantly among the three groups (P = 0.011), with the nCRT group showing a notably higher incidence than the surgery-first group (P = 0.008) and the NAC group (P = 0.043). No significant differences in postoperative complication rates were found between the surgery-first group and the NAC group. After IPTW, nCRT was significantly associated with increased postoperative complication (weighed OR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.13-4.50, P = 0.022), and major postoperative complications (weighed OR:3.27, 95% CI: 1.45-7.39, P = 0.005). Thoracoabdominal approach (weighed OR = 6.47, 95% CI: 1.44-29.13, P = 0.015), combined organ resection (weighed OR = 5.08, 95% CI: 1.66-15.51, P = 0.004), and operative time exceeding 240 min (weighed OR = 2.23, 95% CI: 1.20-4.12, P = 0.011) were also identified as independent risk factors for postoperative complications.
conclusionsNeoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase the risk of postoperative complications. In contrast, nCRT was associated with worse postoperative complications. We should pay more attention to AEG patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
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.