SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2015
Is minimally invasive esophagectomy effective for preventing anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy for cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 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.
Porcine Fibrin Sealant in Preventing Cervical Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy for Esophageal or Junctional Carcinoma: A Phase II,Single Arm，Prospective Study.
A Multicenter Prospective Randomized Controlled Study of Porcine Fibrin Sealant in Preventing Cervical Anastomotic Leakage for Esophageal or Junctional Carcinoma. (PLACE030)
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- The influence of minimally invasive esophagectomy on wound infection in patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- Minimally invasive techniques for transthoracic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.BJS open · 2020Pooled it
- Gastric-tube versus whole-stomach esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2016Pooled it
- Prediction of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a nomogram study integrating systemic inflammation indices and clinical factors.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Evolution of a minimally invasive oesophagectomy program - effective complication management is key.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Consequences of anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy: A single-center experience.Surgery open science · 2023Article
- Review
- Operative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer.South Asian journal of cancer · 2021Article
- The comparisons of three stapler placement methods for intrathoracic mechanistic circular stapling in Ivor Lewis minimally invasive esophagectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Article
- Prediction Model of Anastomotic Leakage Among Esophageal Cancer Patients After Receiving an Esophagectomy: Machine Learning Approach.JMIR medical informatics · 2021Article
- The assessment of intraoperative technique-related risk factors and the treatment of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy: a narrative review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- Minimally invasive esophagectomy: clinical evidence and surgical techniques.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Review
- Minimal Invasive Esophagectomy-a New Dawn of EsophagealSurgery.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2020Review
- The Bucharest ESTES consensus statement on peritonitis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2020Review
- Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (MILE): technique and outcomes of 100 consecutive cases.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Perianastomotic drainage in Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy, does habit affect utility? An 11-year single-center experience.Updates in surgery · 2020Article
- Minimally invasive esophagectomy in the lateral-prone position: Experience of 124 cases in a single center.Thoracic cancer · 2018Article
- Anastomotic reinforcement with omentoplasty reduces anastomotic leakage for minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis.Cancer management and research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCompared with open esophagectomy (OE), minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) proves to have clear benefits in reducing the risk of pulmonary complications for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. The objectives of our study were to explore the superiority of MIE in reducing the occurrence of anastomotic leakages (ALs) when compared to OE.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the superiority of MIE on the occurrence of ALs over OE, by searching many sources (through December, 2014) such as Medline, Embase, Wiley Online Library, and Cochrane Library. Fixed-effects model was used to calculate summary odds ratios (ORs) to quantify associations between OE and MIE groups. Cochran's Q and I(2) statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity among studies.
resultsAmong a total of 43 studies involving 5537 patients included in the meta-analysis, 2527 (45.6%) cases underwent MIE and 3010 (54.4%) cases underwent OE. Compared to patients undergoing OE, patients undergoing MIE did not have statistical significance in reduced occurrence of ALs (OR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.80-1.17). Insignificant reduced occurrence of ALs was not associated with anastomotic location (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.71-1.13) or anastomotic procedure (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.79-1.30).
conclusionsMore proofs are needed to clarify the strengths or weaknesses of MIE in preventing anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy for cancer. A largely randomized, controlled trial should be undertaken to resolve this contentious issue urgently.
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.