ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2016
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.
Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 5 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
83 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Therapeutic Effectiveness of 3-dimensional Video-assisted Thoracic Surgery in the Management of Oesophageal Cancer.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Novel Mediastinoscope-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Postoperative short-term outcomes of minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Thoracic cancer · 2020Pooled it
- Consensus statement of the Hellenic and Cypriot Oesophageal Cancer Study Group on the diagnosis, staging and management of oesophageal cancer.Updates in surgery · 2019Guideline
- The change of health-related quality of life after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Review
- Survival of Open Versus Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer by Tumor Location: An Energy Balancing Weights Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison of utilization trends, outcomes, and costs between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Decreasing Complications After Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy: Is a Totally Minimally Invasive Approach the Solution?Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer: an update on experiences from a tertiary cancer care center in India.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2025Article
- Evolving Therapeutic Strategies in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Advances and Perspectives.Journal of cancer prevention · 2024Review
- Incidence and Predictors of Textbook Outcome after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Two-Center Study.Cancers · 2024Article
- Major Intraoperative Complications during Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Experience is a Hard Teacher.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Minimally invasive thoracic surgery: robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Review
- Perioperative therapy landscape for locally advanced, resectable esophageal cancer: an updated literature review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Review
- Effect of pleural adhesions on short- and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Treatment and survival analysis for 40-year SEER data on upper esophageal cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown's esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis of minimally invasive approaches.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Population-Based Cohort Study from a Prospective National Registry: Better Long-Term Survival in Esophageal Cancer After Minimally Invasive Compared with Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Article
23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes of minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy using population-level data.
methodsMultivariable regression modeling was used to determine predictors associated with the use of minimally invasive approaches for patients in the National Cancer Data Base who underwent resection of middle and distal clinical T13N03M0 esophageal cancers from 2010 to 2012. Perioperative outcomes and 3-year survival were compared between propensity-matched groups of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) or open esophagectomy (OE). A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of using robotic-assisted operations as part of the minimally invasive approach.
resultsAmong 4,266 patients included, 1,308 (30.6%) underwent MIE. It was more likely to be used in patients treated at academic (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 10.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2-33.1) or comprehensive cancer facilities (adjusted OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 2.6-21.1). Compared with propensity-matched patients who underwent OE, patients who underwent MIE had significantly more lymph nodes examined (15 versus 13; p = 0.016) and shorter hospital lengths of stay (10 days versus 11 days; p = 0.046) but similar resection margin positivity, readmission, and 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05). Survival was similar between the matched groups at 3 years for both adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (p > 0.05). Compared with MIE without robotic assistance, use of a robotic approach was not associated with any significant differences in perioperative outcomes (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThe use of minimally invasive techniques to perform esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is associated with modestly improved perioperative outcomes without compromising survival.
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.