ArticleMinimally invasive surgery2017
Robot-Assisted Hybrid Esophagectomy Is Associated with a Shorter Length of Stay Compared to Conventional Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Minimally invasive surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Video-Assisted, and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- [Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer-Indicators for quality in diagnostics and treatment].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021Pooled it
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a weighted short- and long-term outcomes analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Transhiatal robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: unclear benefits compared to traditional transhiatal esophagectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Robotic Esophagectomy. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Outcomes of robotic esophagectomies for esophageal cancer by hospital volume: an analysis of the national cancer database.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Propensity score-matched comparison between open and minimal invasive hybrid esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Article
- Feasibility and usability of real-time intraoperative quantitative fluorescent-guided perfusion assessment during resection of gastroesophageal junction cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Article
- Efficacy of hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomyWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the peri- and postoperative data between a hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) and the conventional Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.
methodsRetrospective comparison of perioperative characteristics, postoperative complications, and survival between HMIE and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.
results216 patients were included, with 160 procedures performed with the conventional and 56 with the HMIE approach. Lower perioperative blood loss was found in the HMIE group (600 ml versus 200 ml,
conclusionsThe HMIE was associated with lower intraoperative blood loss, a higher lymph node harvest, and a shorter hospital stay. However, the inborn limitations with the retrospective design stress a need for prospective randomized studies. Registration number is DRKS00013023.
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.