Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29670413›Full record

ArticlePatient related outcome measures2018

Quality of life after esophageal resection.

Wendy Jo Svetanoff, Rose McGahan, Saurabh Singhal, Carrie Bertellotti, Sumeet K Mittal

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Jejunostomy and Nasogastric Feeding in Minimally Invasive McKeown Esophagectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Trial
  2. Patient-reported outcomes following esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Health-related quality of life after esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wendy Jo SvetanoffDepartment of Pediatric Surgery, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Rose McGahanDepartment of Surgery, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE, USA.
Saurabh SinghalNorton Thoracic Institute, St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Carrie BertellottiDepartment of Surgery, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE, USA.
Sumeet K MittalDepartment of Surgery, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE, USA.
Creighton University · USSt. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEsophageal resection is the primary treatment for malignant esophageal disease and the last resort for benign end-stage esophageal disease. There is a paucity of research comparing the long-term quality of life (QoL) following surgery among these two populations. The aim of this study was to examine the patient reported QoL after esophageal resection using questionnaires focusing on general well-being and esophageal-specific symptoms.

methodsA prospectively maintained database of post-operatively administered European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) with supplemental esophageal cancer-specific questionnaires (OES-18) was queried after institutional review board approval through Creighton University School of Medicine. Inclusions were made if patients received an esophageal resection for benign or malignant esophageal disease. Emergency procedures, delayed reconstructions, and stage IV disease were excluded. Student's

resultsA total of 39 out of 248 patients with malignant disease and 24 out of 46 with benign disease completed the questionnaire. A mean post-operative follow-up of 53 months with a response rate of 40% was obtained. There was no difference in physical ( DISCUSSION: The underlying disease between these cohorts is drastically different, but postoperative functional status, generalized symptoms, swallowing ability, and esophageal pain were similar. There was no difference in functional status between the general population and the esophageal resection cohorts. Patients with malignant disease reported less problems with eating and a better QoL than their benign counterparts.

Indexed as

end-stage esophageal diseaseesophageal canceresophageal resectionesophagectomyquality of life

Identifiers

PMID29670413
PMCPMC5894654
OpenAlexW2795806620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.