ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2018
Spontaneous regionalization of esophageal cancer surgery: an analysis of the National Cancer Database.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Hospital Volume on Postoperative Outcomes for Esophagectomy and Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Assessment of a collaborative treatment model for trimodal management of esophageal cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Geographical Disparities in Esophageal Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the United States.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Navigating by Stars: Using CMS Star Ratings to Choose Hospitals for Complex Cancer Surgery.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2020Article
- Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Review
- Differential Safety Between Top-Ranked Cancer Hospitals and Their Affiliates for Complex Cancer Surgery.JAMA network open · 2019Article
- Motivators, Barriers, and Facilitators to Traveling to the Safest Hospitals in the United States for Complex Cancer Surgery.JAMA network open · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophagectomy patients are up to three times more likely to die after surgery when cared for at low-volume hospitals (LVHs). Increased awareness by patients and clinicians of the hazards of esophagectomy at LVHs, may inspire a "spontaneous regionalization" away from LVHs, yet the extent to which this has taken place is unclear.
methodsRetrospective analysis of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) across two eras: 2004-2006 (Era 1) and 2010-2012 (Era 2). Primary outcomes included the proportion of patients at high-volume hospitals (HVHs) (≥13/year per Leapfrog Group), adjusted, and unadjusted 90-day mortality.
resultsThe NCDB captured 5,968 esophagectomy patients in Era 1 and 5,580 in Era 2, a 6.5% decrease (P<0.001). Fewer hospitals performed esophagectomies in Era 2 (756
conclusionsSpontaneous regionalization of esophageal cancer surgery has not occurred on a large scale, yet for high-risk patients, the hazards of being cared for at LVHs have dissipated. Further study is needed to optimize alignment of esophagectomy patients and hospitals.
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.