ArticleThoracic cancer2018
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy is safe and feasible for treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The treatments and postoperative complications of esophageal cancer: a review.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Impact of treatment interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery in lung squamous cell carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2024Observational
- Comparisons of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted, video-assisted, and open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment: a retrospective study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Impacts of additional cycles of neoadjuvant immunotherapy on surgery in non-small-cell lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2023Article
- Consequences of anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy: A single-center experience.Surgery open science · 2023Article
- Feasibility research of enhanced recovery after surgery implemented in esophageal cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Impact of the interval between neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and surgery on surgical-pathological outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Comparison of the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive, video-assisted minimally invasive, and open esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- Clinical significance and prognosis of supraclavicular lymph node metastasis in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer.Annals of translational medicine · 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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe advantage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by open esophagectomy for treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma has been widely recognized. However, the safety and feasibility of NAC for patients receiving minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential impact of prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the clinical outcome of MIE by comparing two groups of patients, MIE alone and NAC plus MIE.
methodsFrom May 2013 to July 2017, 124 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent MIE in our department, with 57 cases receiving NAC plus MIE and 67 cases receiving MIE alone. Perioperative parameters and short-term postoperative survival were compared between these two groups to evaluate the safety and feasibility of NAC given before MIE.
resultsThe group with NAC plus MIE had slightly longer operating time, more blood loss, higher morbidity, increased chance of surgical intensive care unit stay, and longer surgical intensive care unit stay time than the group with MIE alone. However, there was no statistically significant difference between these two groups (P > 0.05). The number of lymph nodes harvested was similar in the two groups without significant difference (P > 0.05). The overall survival was not significantly different between these two groups either (P > 0.05), although before surgery the clinical stage of the group with NAC plus MIE was more advanced than the group with MIE alone.
conclusionsNAC followed by MIE is safe and feasible for treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. NAC does not negatively impact the therapeutic outcome of MIE.
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.