ArticleInternational journal of surgery case reports2017
Thoracoscopic surgery in the prone position for esophageal cancer in patients with situs inversus totalis: A report of two cases.
Article in International journal of surgery case reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in a patient with situs inversus totalis through a total of five ports.Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi · 2022Article
- Total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in an esophageal cancer patient with situs inversus totalis: A case report.Thoracic cancer · 2021Article
- Operative Challenges with Minimally Invasive McKeown Esophagostomy with Two-Field Lymphadenectomy in a Case of Situs Inversus Totalis with Carcinoma Esophagus: A Case Report with Review of the Literature.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis in a situs inversus totalis patient.Journal of surgical case reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSitus inversus totalis (SIT) is a rare congenital condition characterized by a complete transposition of thoracic and abdominal organs. Here, we present two successful cases of left thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for SIT-associated esophageal cancer. PRESENTATION OF CASE: Our first case was of an 82-year-old man who underwent a left thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position, followed by hand-assisted laparoscopic gastric mobilization. Surgical duration and blood loss were 661min and 165g, respectively. His postoperative course was uneventful. The second case was of a 66-year-old man who underwent a left thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position, followed by gastric mobilization via laparotomy owing to a concomitant intestinal malrotation and polysplenia. Surgical duration and blood loss were 637min and 220g, respectively. We trained for the surgical procedures preoperatively using left-inverted and right-inverted thoracoscopic surgical videos of patients with normal anatomy. DISCUSSION: Surgical procedures in SIT patients are challenging owing to their mirrored anatomy. Recognition of their variations is thus important to avoid intraoperative accidental injuries. Left-inverted and right-inverted thoracoscopic surgical videos of patients with normal anatomy were found to be useful for image training prior to the actual surgery.
conclusionThoracoscopic surgical treatment for esophageal cancer associated with SIT in the prone position can be performed safely, similar to the manner performed for thoracoscopic surgery in the right decubitus position, or surgery via an open thoracotomy. Gastric mobilization via laparotomy should be considered in patients associated other anatomic variations.
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.