ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2016
Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04750096 (Respiratory Failure in Esophagectomy. Results After Implantation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol.), which is not on this map. Cited by 53 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.
Respiratory Failure in Esophagectomy. Results After Implantation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The learning curve of robotic esophagectomy: a systematic review with a proposed training and competency assessment framework.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Risk factors for pneumonia after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Minimally invasive techniques for transthoracic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.BJS open · 2020Pooled 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
- Video-assisted mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Trial
- Letter to the Editor: "Respiratory complications following minimally invasive esophagectomy: associated factors and predictive value of lung age".Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Review
- Outcomes of Three-Port Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy in Prone Position for Resectable Esophageal Cancer.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Stroke volume variation and dynamic arterial elastance predict fluid responsiveness even in thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a prospective observational study.Journal of anesthesia · 2023Observational
- Controversies in the surgical management of esophageal adenocarcinoma.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Review
- Consequences of anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy: A single-center experience.Surgery open science · 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
- Review
- Survival after minimally invasive vs. open radical nephrectomy for stage I and II renal cell carcinoma.International journal of clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Thoracoscopy-Assisted Esophagectomy vs Transhiatal Esophagectomy for Carcinoma Esophagus: a Prospective Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2022Article
- Does high body mass index influence the postoperative complications and long-term survival in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after minimally invasive esophagectomy?Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Article
- Early implementation of a perioperative nutrition support pathway for patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Risk of chyle leak after robotic versus video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Operative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer.South Asian journal of cancer · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in comparison with the open esophagectomy (OE) remain uncertain in esophageal cancer treatment. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes of the two surgical modalities.
methodsSearches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov with the following index words: "esophageal cancer", "VATS", "MIE", "thoracoscopic esophagectomy", and "open esophagectomy" for relative studies that compared the effects between MIE and OE. Random-effect models were used, and heterogeneity was assessed.
resultsA total of 20 studies were included in the analysis, consisting of four randomized controlled trials and 16 prospective studies. MIE has reduced operative blood loss (
conclusionMIE is a better choice for esophageal cancer because patients undergoing MIE may benefit from reduced blood loss, less respiratory complications, and also improved overall survival condition compared with OE. However, more randomized controlled trials are still needed to verify these differences.
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.