Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29997926›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2018

Long-term survival of the middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer patients after surgical treatment through left or right thoracic approach.

Ding Yang, You-Sheng Mao, Jie He, Shu-Geng Gao, Ke-Lin Sun, Ju-Wei Mu, Qi Xue, Da-Li Wang, Yu-Shun Gao, Jun Zhao and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Survival risk prediction model for patients with pTJournal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ding YangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
You-Sheng MaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Jie HeDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Shu-Geng GaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Ke-Lin SunDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Ju-Wei MuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Qi XueDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Da-Li WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Yu-Shun GaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Jun ZhaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Xiang-Yang LiuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
De-Kang FangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Jian LiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Yong-Gang WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Liang-Ze ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Jin-Feng HuangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Bing WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEsophageal cancer is one of the most prevalent malignancies with a high incidence and mortality in China, the main treatment for esophageal cancer at present is still surgery-based multimodality treatment, and surgery is still the most effective measure. However, the modes of surgical treatment for esophageal cancer have been diverse. The surgical approaches can be mainly divided into the left thoracic approach and right thoracic approach in China. The long-term survival of the patients treated through right approach was reported better than that through left thoracic approach, but until now no statistically significant difference was found between two approaches, especially, for those with middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer without suspected upper mediastinal lymph node metastasis in preoperative examinations, no definite conclusion have been made on selection of the approach, therefore, this studies try to compare the long-term survival between two approaches .

methodsThe data of 402 cases with complete resection and two-field lymph node dissection from January, 2011 to December, 2011 in the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences was retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis and life-table in SPSS 22.0 and Stata 14.0 were used to analyze the survival.

resultsTotally, 402 cases were surgically treated either via left or right thoracic approach. The overall 5-year survival rate of this series was 38%, it was 37% in 281 cases surgically treated through left approach, and 39% in 121 cases through right approach (P=0.908). The 5-year survival of 256 patients without suspected lymph node metastasis in the upper mediastinum based on the preoperative examinations surgically treated through left approach was 38% versus 43% of 88 cases through right approach (P=0.404). After PSM, the 5-year survival of 110 cases surgically treated through left approach was 32% versus 40% of another matched 110 cases through right approach (P=0.146). for the patients without suspected lymph node metastasis in the upper mediastinum based on preoperative examinations, the 5-year survival of 88 surgically treated through left approach was 33% versus 44% of another matched 88 cases through right approach (P=0.239).

conclusionsFor the middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer patients, whether or not who has suspected lymph node metastasis in the upper mediastinum based on preoperative CT and EUS, the surgical treatment through right thoracic approach can achieve better but not significantly better overall survival than that through left thoracic approach. Further prospective randomized clinical trials are still needed to verify this disputed issue on approach selection.

Indexed as

Esophageal cancerprognosispropensity score matching (PSM)surgical treatmentsurvival

Identifiers

PMID29997926
PMCPMC6006125
OpenAlexW2803648865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.