Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26037024›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of surgery2015

Quality of Life and Late Complications After Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Esophagectomy: Results of a Randomized Trial.

K W Maas, M A Cuesta, M I van Berge Henegouwen, J Roig, L Bonavina, C Rosman, S S Gisbertz, S S A Y Biere, D L van der Peet, J H Klinkenbijl and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 103 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
103citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
19.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

103 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 202 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical practice guidelines for esophagogastric junction cancer: Upper GI Oncology Summit 2023.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024
    Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Imaging in Esophageal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Patient-reported outcomes following esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024
    Review

43 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

K W MaasDepartment of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M A Cuesta
M I van Berge Henegouwen
J Roig
L Bonavina
C Rosman
S S Gisbertz
S S A Y Biere
D L van der Peet
J H Klinkenbijl
M W Hollmann
E S de Lange
H J Bonjer
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLAcademic Medical Center · NLCanisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis · NLHospital Universitari de Girona Doctor Josep Trueta · ESIRCCS Policlinico San Donato · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is widely being implemented for esophageal cancer in order to reduce morbidity and improve quality of life. Non-randomized studies investigating the mid-term quality of life after MIE show conflicting results at 1-year follow-up. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine whether MIE has a continuing better mid-term 1-year quality of life than open esophagectomy (OE) indicating both a faster recovery and less procedure-related symptoms.

methodsA one-year follow-up analysis of the quality of life was conducted for patients participating in the randomized trial in which MIE was compared with OE. Late complications as symptomatic stenosis of anastomosis are also reported.

resultsQuality of life at 1 year was better in the MIE group than in the OE group for the physical component summary SF36 [50 (6; 48-53) versus 45 (9; 42-48) p .003]; global health C30 [79 (10; 76-83) versus 67 (21; 60-75) p .004]; and pain OES18 module [6 (9; 2-8) versus 16 (16; 10-22) p .001], respectively. Twenty six patients (44%) in the MIE and 22 patients (39%) in the OE group were diagnosed and treated for symptomatic stenosis of the anastomosis.

conclusionsThis first randomized trial shows that MIE is associated with a better mid-term one-year quality of life compared to OE.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAdolescentAdultAgedEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingPsychometricsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26037024
PMCPMC4496501
OpenAlexW651915879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.