Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Citation
Patrick Heger, Susanne Blank, Kathrin Grummich, Markus K. Diener, Markus W. Büchler, Thomas
Schmidt, André L. Mihaljevic. Surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal
junction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016036476 Available
from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42016036476
Review question
The aims of this systematic review are:1. To compare the rates of negative resection margins and extent of
lymphadenectomy within the two different surgical approaches for AEG.
2. To compare both therapies with regard to postoperative morbidity and mortality.
Searches
We will search the following databases: MEDLINE via Pubmed, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database
of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, Web of
Science.
Exemplary search for MEDLINE:
((((((((oesophagogastr* junction) OR esophagogastr* junction) OR gastrooesophag* junction) OR
gastroesophag* junction) OR siewert) OR aeg) OR adenocarcinoma)) AND ((((((((((((gastr* operation) OR
gastr* surger*) OR gastr* resect*) OR gastrectom*) OR oesphag* operation) OR esophag* operation*) OR
oesophag* surger*) OR esophag* surger*) OR oesophag* resect*) OR esophag* resect*) OR
oesophagectom*) OR esophagectom*)
There will be no language restrictions or other restrictions.
Participants/population
Patients undergoing surgical therapy for AEG via thoracoabdominal esophagectomy or transhiatally
extended gastrectomy.
Intervention(s), exposure(s)
Inclusion criteria:
- Trials comparing the thoracoabdominal esophagectomy and the transhiatally extended gastrectomy for
surgical therapy of AEG.
- RCTs, prospective and retrospective studies.
Exclusion criteria:
- Case series, case reports.
- Studies not comparing the two approaches of interest.
Comparator(s)/control
Comparison of the two approaches of interest.
Page: 1 / 4
PROSPERO
International prospective register of systematic reviews
Primary outcome(s)
The number of dissected lymph nodes.
Secondary outcome(s)
Negative resection margins, postoperative morbidity, rate of anastomotic leakage, postoperative mortality, all
forms of survival (disease-free survival, overall survival...).
Funding sources/sponsors
None
Conflicts of interest
None known
Page: 2 / 4
PROSPERO
International prospective register of systematic reviews
Language
English
Country
Germany
Stage of review
Review_Completed_not_published
Details of any existing review of the same topic by the same authors
Stage of review at time of this submission
Revision note
Update on stage of review
Versions
14 March 2016
20 May 2016
31 March 2017
PROSPERO
This information has been provided by the named contact for this review. CRD has accepted this information in good
faith and registered the review in PROSPERO. CRD bears no responsibility or liability for the content of this registration
Page: 3 / 4
PROSPERO
International prospective register of systematic reviews
Page: 4 / 4