ArticleSurgery today2026
Comparison of pedicled jejunal versus ileal and colonic reconstruction when gastric tube reconstruction is not feasible during esophagectomy.
Article in Surgery today, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEsophageal reconstruction using substitutes other than the stomach is technically demanding and it is often associated with postoperative complications. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of ileal and colonic reconstruction (IC) and pedicled jejunum reconstruction (PJ) after esophagectomy.
methodsThis study included 84 patients who underwent esophagectomy without gastric tube reconstruction (13 patients underwent IC and 71 underwent PJ). The clinicopathological characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and long-term nutritional status were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe reconstruction procedure time was significantly shorter in the PJ group than in the IC group (P = 0.042), and blood loss during one-stage operations was lower in the PJ group (P = 0.010). Postoperative diarrhea occurred less frequently in the PJ group (P = 0.001). At 12 months after surgery, the decreases in the body mass index, psoas muscle area, psoas muscle volume, and psoas muscle index were significantly smaller in the PJ group (P = 0.022, 0.002, 0.003, and 0.042, respectively). Blood-based nutritional indicators were also more favorable in the PJ group. No significant differences were observed in the survival outcomes between the two groups.
conclusionPJ is considered to be the preferred reconstruction method when gastric tube reconstruction cannot be performed after esophagectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42240884What 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.