ArticleSurgery today2026
Conduit size and the risk of delayed gastric conduit emptying after 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposesDelayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) is a frequent complication after esophagectomy that affects nutrition and the quality of life. Subtotal gastric conduit (STG) and wide gastric conduit (WG) reconstructions are commonly performed. This study assessed whether WG reduces DGCE compared to STG.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 169 patients who underwent posterior mediastinal gastric reconstruction between January 2019 and December 2024. Patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis procedures and non-gastric reconstructions were excluded. The conduits were classified as STG or WG based on the stapler firings. The resected gastric length and maximal diameter were measured. The outcomes included DGCE, anastomotic complications, pneumonia, weight loss, serum albumin, hemoglobin, and psoas muscle index (PMI). Appropriate statistical tests were performed.
resultsOf the 169 patients, 128 underwent STG and 41 underwent WG reconstruction. The baseline characteristics were similar, although the WG group included more female patients and had a higher BMI. The resected gastric length was shorter in the STG (p < 0.001), whereas the conduit length tended to be longer (p = 0.051). No significant differences were observed in terms of DGCE, anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, weight loss, PMI, or albumin levels. Hemoglobin at 1 year was slightly lower in WG (10.2 vs. 11.1 g/dL, p = 0.002).
conclusionsWG reconstruction did not reduce DGCE or other complications compared with STG reconstruction. The gastric conduit size alone may not prevent DGCE. Further studies are warranted to explore surgical strategies for improving postoperative gastric emptying.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42446708What 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.