Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29022068›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2018

Esophagectomy for End-Stage Achalasia: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Alberto Aiolfi, Emanuele Asti, Gianluca Bonitta, Luigi Bonavina

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. ACG Clinical Guidelines: Diagnosis and Management of Achalasia.The American journal of gastroenterology · 2020
    Guideline
  6. Guideline
  7. Minimally invasive surgical management of mid- to distal esophageal diverticula: a large single-center review.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alberto AiolfiDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, University of Milan, Piazza Edmondo Malan, 1, 20097, San Donato Milanese, MI, Italy.
Emanuele AstiDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, University of Milan, Piazza Edmondo Malan, 1, 20097, San Donato Milanese, MI, Italy.
Gianluca BonittaDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, University of Milan, Piazza Edmondo Malan, 1, 20097, San Donato Milanese, MI, Italy.
Luigi BonavinaDivision of General Surgery, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, University of Milan, Piazza Edmondo Malan, 1, 20097, San Donato Milanese, MI, Italy. luigi.bonavina@unimi.it.ORCID 0000-0002-4880-1670
University of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndications for surgery and clinical outcomes of esophagectomy in the management of end-stage achalasia are not clearly defined. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide evidence-based information to help in the decision-making and in the choice of surgical technique.

methodsAn extensive literature search was conducted to identify all reports on esophagectomy for end-stage achalasia patients over the past three decades. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were thoroughly consulted matching the terms "achalasia," "end-stage achalasia," "esophagectomy" and "esophageal resection" with "AND" and "OR." Short- and long-term outcome data were extracted. Pooled prevalence of pneumonia, anastomotic leakage and mortality were calculated using Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation and DerSimonian-Laird estimator in random effect meta-analysis. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated using I

resultsEight papers published between 1989 and 2014 matched the inclusion criteria. In total, 1307 patients were included. Esophagectomy was performed through a transthoracic (78.7%) or a transhiatal (21.3%) approach. The stomach was used as an esophageal substitute in 95% of patients. Pooled prevalence of pneumonia, anastomotic leakage and mortality were 10% (95% CI 4-18%), 7% (95% CI 4-10%) and 2% (95% CI 1-3%), respectively.

conclusionsEsophagectomy for end-stage achalasia is safe and effective. Based on the results of this study, esophagectomy should be performed without hesitation in patients who are fit for major surgery and present with disabling symptoms, poor quality of life and dolichomegaesophagus recalcitrant to multiple endoscopic dilatations and/or surgical myotomies.

Indexed as

EsophagectomyAnastomotic LeakEsophageal AchalasiaHumansPneumoniaPostoperative Complications

Identifiers

PMID29022068
OpenAlexW2763749465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.