ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
The clinical effects of laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy versus nasointestinal tube insertion with subsequent chemotherapy for uncurable gastric cancer patients with outlet obstruction.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy (LGJ) versus nasointestinal tube (NIT) insertion, both combined with chemotherapy, in patients with advanced gastric cancer and gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and to provide evidence for optimal management strategies. Methods: This retrospective study included 63 patients with incurable advanced gastric cancer and GOO treated at Fujian Provincial Hospital, between January 2019 and December 2022. Patients were assigned to either the LGJ group (n=33) or the NIT group (n=30). Clinical baseline data, short-term complications, quality of life (QOL), nutritional and inflammatory markers, chemotherapy response, and conversion surgery outcomes were compared. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) were evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. No severe complications occurred in the LGJ group. Post-obstruction, LGJ significantly improved GOOSS scores, with 90.9% of patients resuming full oral intake, compared to 30% unable to eat in the NIT group. The LGJ group had longer hospital stays and delayed chemotherapy initiation but showed lower rates of elevated NLR and CEA (P<0.05). QOL declined more frequently in the NIT group (P<0.05). No significant differences were observed in chemotherapy response, conversion surgery rates (30.3% vs 23.3%), or pathological outcomes. Median OS was 18.3 months in the LGJ group vs 14.3 months in the NIT group (P = 0.453). Borrmann classification and conversion surgery were independent prognostic factors for OS. Conclusion: LGJ offers superior improvement in nutritional status and QOL compared to NIT, with comparable survival outcomes. Borrmann type and conversion surgery are key predictors of long-term prognosis in this patient population.
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.