ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
Initial experience from a large referral center with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy for oncologic purposes.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Robotic Surgery the Future for Resectable Esophageal Cancer?: A Systematic Literature Review of Oncological and Clinical Outcomes.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- A reproducible anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a simple fix for a persistent problem in a zero-leak consecutive series.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Learning curve of Robotic Assisted Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAMIE): initial experience.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Totally minimally invasive laparoscopic robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: improved technique and outcomes over 200 cases.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy: Current Situation and Future Perspectives.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2023Review
- Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAILE): A review of surgical techniques and clinical outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Minimally invasive esophagectomy.Current problems in surgery · 2021Review
- Outcomes of robotic esophagectomies for esophageal cancer by hospital volume: an analysis of the national cancer database.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- International consensus statement on robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE).Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Review
- Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: Meticulous surgery minimizing postoperative complications.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2020Review
- The first year is the hardest: a comparison of early versus late experience after the introduction of robotic hiatal hernia repair.Journal of robotic surgery · 2020Article
- Early Quality of Life Outcomes After Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2019Article
- [Evidence for robotic surgery in oncological visceral surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2019Review
- Fully robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (RAMIE4) for esophageal cancer after emergency surgery and ligation of the gastroduodenal artery.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Article
- Esophagectomy from then to now.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2018Review
- Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity score matched analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2018Article
- Robotic oesophago-gastric cancer surgery.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Article
- Robotic surgery for esophageal cancer: Merits and demerits.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2017Review
- Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a comment on the Ruijin hospital experience.Journal of thoracic disease · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe report our initial experience of patients undergoing robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy (RAIL) for oncologic purposes at a large-referral center.
methodsA retrospective review of all consecutive patients undergoing RAIL from 2010-2011 was performed. Basic demographics were recorded. Oncologic variables recorded included: tumor type, location, postoperative tumor margins, and nodal harvest. Immediate 30-day postoperative complications also were analyzed.
resultsFifty patients underwent RAIL with median age of 66 (range 42-82) years. The mean body mass index was 28.6 ± 0.7 kg/m(2); 54% and the majority had an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of 3. The mean and median number of lymph nodes retrieved during surgery was 20 ± 1.4 and 18.5 respectively. R0 resections were achieved in all patients. Postoperative complications occurred in 14 (28%) patients, including atrial fibrillation in 5 (10%), pneumonia in 5 (10%), anastomotic leak in 1 (2%), conduit staple line leak in 1 (2%), and chyle leak in 2 (4%). The median ICU stay and length of hospitalization (LOH) were 2 and 9 days respectively. Total mean operating time calculated from time of skin incision to wound closure was 445 ± 85 minutes; however, operative times decreased over time. Similarly, there was a trend toward lower complications after the first 29 cases but this did not reach statistical significance. There were no in-hospital mortalities.
conclusionsWe demonstrated that RAIL for esophageal cancer can be performed safely and may be associated with fewer complications after a learning curve, shorter ICU stay, and LOH.
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.