ArticlePloS one2016
High Intrathoracic Anastomosis with Thoracoscopy Is Safe and Feasible for Treatment of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful Endoscopic Vacuum Therapy for Extensive Gastric Tubing Necrosis after Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy: A Case Report.Journal of chest surgery · 2023Article
- Intrathoracic anastomosis using handsewn purse-string suturing by the double-ligation method in laparo-thoracoscopic esophagectomy.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2023Article
- Safe and convenient intrathoracic anastomosis in minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2023Article
- Case report: Drainage tube penetrating anastomosis as a rare cause for long-term nonunion of esophagogastric anastomosis in neck.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- A new technology for reducing anastomotic fistula in the neck after esophageal cancer surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.Journal of visualized surgery · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has the potential to reduce the morbidity and mortality of esophageal cancer surgery. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has a high incidence of earlier lymphatic spread and is usually located more proximal to the incisor than esophageal adenocarcinoma; consequently, the anastomosis should be made more proximal in the thorax or in the neck. We adopted the proximal intrathoracic anastomotic technique using thoracoscopy for mid-to-lower ESCC.
methodsFrom October 2010 to August 2014, fifty-eight consecutive patients underwent MIE for ESCC. After laparoscopic gastric tubing, thoracoscopic esophageal resection and reconstruction were performed using a 28-mm circular stapler following radical mediastinal lymph node dissection. We tried to make an anastomosis at the apex of the chest. Postoperative outcomes, including overall survival and recurrence, were assessed.
resultsThe mean patient age was 64.3±9 years. The mean operative time was 371.8±51.6 minutes, and the duration of the thorax procedure was 254.8±38.3 minutes. The mean number of lymph nodes dissected was 31±11.7. The mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay and hospital stay were 3.5±8.2 hours and 13.6±7.4 days, respectively. The level of anastomosis was 22.3±1.8cm from the incisor. One patient died of uncontrolled sepsis due to necrosis of the gastric graft. Two patients developed small contained leakage. Nine patients exhibited distant metastasis during the follow-up period.
conclusionThoracoscopic intrathoracic anastomosis at the proximal esophagus is feasible and safe.
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.