Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15213620›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of surgery2004

Perioperative granulocyte colony-stimulating factor does not prevent severe infections in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Hartmut Schaefer, Andreas Engert, Guido Grass, Georg Mansmann, Gernot Wassmer, Kai Hubel, Dietrich Loehlein, Bernward C Ulrich, Hans Lippert, Wolfram T Knoefel and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical TrialClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of surgery, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Timing and Outcomes of Abdominal Surgery in Neutropenic Patients.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2019
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Hartmut SchaeferDepartment of Visceral and Vascular Surgery, University of Cologne, Germany.
Andreas Engert
Guido Grass
Georg Mansmann
Gernot Wassmer
Kai Hubel
Dietrich Loehlein
Bernward C Ulrich
Hans Lippert
Wolfram T Knoefel
Arnulf H Hoelscher
University of Cologne · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEKlinikum Dortmund · DEUniversity Hospital Magdeburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEsophagectomy for esophageal cancer is associated with substantial postoperative morbidity as a result of infectious complications. In a prior phase II study, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was shown to improve leukocyte function and to reduce infection rates after esophagectomy. The aim of the current randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III trial was to investigate the clinical efficacy of perioperative G-CSF administration in reducing infection and mortality after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND

methodsOne hundred fifty five patients with resectable esophageal cancer were randomly assigned to perioperative G-CSF at standard doses (77 patients) or placebo (76 patients), administered from 2 days before until day 7 after esophagectomy. The G-CSF and placebo groups were comparable as regards age, gender, risk, cancer stage, frequency of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy, and type of esophagectomy (transthoracic or transhiatal esophageal resection).

resultsOf 155 randomized patients, 153 were eligible for the intention-to-treat analysis. The rate of infection occurring within the first 10 days after esophagectomy was 43.4% (confidence interval 32.8-55.9%) in the placebo and 44.2% (confidence interval 32.1-55.3%) in the G-CSF group (P = 0.927). 30-day mortality amounted to 5.2% in the G-CSF group versus 5.3% in the placebo group (P = 0.985). Similar results were found in the per-protocol analysis.

conclusionPerioperative administration of G-CSF failed to reduce postoperative morbidity, infection rate, or mortality in patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy.

Indexed as

EsophagectomyPremedicationAdultAgedAnti-Infective AgentsDouble-Blind MethodEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHumansInfectionsMaleMediastinitisMiddle AgedPerioperative CareAnti-Infective AgentsFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID15213620
PMCPMC1356376
OpenAlexW1979481039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.