ArticleSurgery today2015
Short-term surgical outcomes of reduced port surgery for esophageal achalasia.
Article in Surgery today, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiple huge epiphrenic esophageal diverticula with motility disease treated with video-assisted thoracoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic esophagectomy: a case report.Surgical case reports · 2017Article
- Impact of esophageal flexion level on the surgical outcome in patients with sigmoid esophageal achalasia.Surgery today · 2017Article
- Article
- Data analyses and perspectives on laparoscopic surgery for esophageal achalasia.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo clarify the feasibility and utility of reduced port surgery (RPS) for achalasia.
methodsBetween September 2005 and June 2013, 359 patients with esophageal achalasia, excluding cases of reoperation, underwent laparoscopic Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication (LHD) according to our clinical pathway. Three-hundred and twenty-seven patients underwent LHD with five incisions (conventional approach), while the other 32 patients underwent RPS, including eight via SILS. The clinical data were collected in a prospective fashion and retrospectively reviewed. We selected 24 patients matched for gender, age and morphologic type with patients in the RPS group from among the 327 patients (C group). The surgical outcomes were compared between the C and RPS groups.
resultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in the duration of symptoms, dysphagia score, chest pain score, shape of the distal esophagus and esophageal clearance. The operative time was significantly longer in the RPS group than in the C group (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the length of postoperative hospital stay or rates of bleeding, mucosal injury of the esophagus and/or stomach and postoperative complications. The symptom scores significantly improved after surgery in both groups (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the C group and RPS group in terms of the postoperative symptom scores or satisfaction scores after surgery.
conclusionsThe surgical outcomes of RPS for achalasia are comparable to those obtained with the conventional method.
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.