ReviewJournal of visualized surgery2017
Minimally invasive and robotic esophagectomy: state of the art.
Review in Journal of visualized surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in robotic-assisted McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The Implementation of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: A Step Toward Better Outcomes?Oncology and therapy · 2022Review
- Early implementation of a perioperative nutrition support pathway for patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Outcomes of robotic esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Review
- Article
- Robotic oesophago-gastric cancer surgery.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Esophageal cancer is the eight most common cancer in the world and surgical resection remains the gold standard not only in providing the optimal chance for cure but also the best palliation for dysphagia. Esophagectomy is a complex operation and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality that are reported as 23-50% and 2-8% in western country. At the moment no gold standard techniques exist for esophagectomy. The choice of the technique depends on several factors; location of tumor and surgeon's experience are probably the most relevant. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), performed in high volume centers, has shown to reduce the rate of complications with the same oncological outcome as open esophagectomy. The addition of robotic technique to MIE is relatively new and is gaining widespread acceptance. Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is safe and feasible, and its short-term results are comparable to conventional MIE. Randomized studies are needed to assess if there is any real benefit associated to the use of the robotic approach.
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.