ReviewClinical endoscopy2023
Endoscopic treatment of upper gastrointestinal postsurgical leaks: a narrative review.
Review in Clinical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel use of endoscopic pigtail drainage in recurrent gastric perforation following intentional drug overdose: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Endoscopic treatment of anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal surgery: endoscopic self-expandable metallic stent or endoscopic vacuum therapy?Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Article
- Intravaginal endoscopic vacuum therapy of a rectovaginal fistula: expanding boundaries.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Endoscopic stenting for benign upper gastrointestinal conditions: safety and efficacy profile of a fully covered double-bump antimigratory stent.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Endoscopic vacuum therapy for gastrointestinal transmural defects: a literature review.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy: When and How to Use It?GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Upper gastrointestinal postsurgical leaks are life-threatening conditions with high mortality rates and are one of the most feared complications of surgery. Leaks are challenging to manage and often require radiological, endoscopic, or surgical intervention. Steady advancements in interventional endoscopy in recent decades have allowed the development of new endoscopic devices and techniques that provide a more effective and minimally invasive therapeutic option compared to surgery. Since there is no consensus regarding the most appropriate therapeutic approach for managing postsurgical leaks, this review aimed to summarize the best available current data. Our discussion specifically focuses on leak diagnosis, treatment aims, comparative endoscopic technique outcomes, and combined multimodality approach efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.