ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2018
Initial experience with uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery esophagectomy.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uniportal versus Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Comparative outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer undergoing single-port and four-port thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a single-center experience.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery esophagectomy outcomes in 40 consecutive patients.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2023Article
- Uniportal-VATS vs. open McKeown esophagectomy: Surgical and long-term oncological outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Uniportal VATS Approach in Esophageal Cancer - How to Do It Update.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Techniques of uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery-esophageal and mediastinal indications.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiportal thoracoscopic approach is already a well standardized procedure for minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE); conversely very few reports have been published about uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) technique till now. We present our preliminary experience with uniportal VATS esophagectomy, evaluating short-term outcomes as perioperative mortality, complications, oncological radicality, postoperative pain and cosmetic results.
methodsFrom December 2016 to November 2017, the prospectively collected clinical data of 12 patients, who underwent uniportal VATS esophagectomy and reconstruction with a stomach conduit, according to McKeown technique, were reviewed and outcomes evaluated.
resultsThe mean age of population was 60.67±8.61 years. Ten (83.3%) patients were males. The main histological type was a squamous cell carcinoma in six patients (50%). No patient had a local recurrence. After 4.33±3.31 months 10 patients (83.3%) were alive with no evidence of disease; 2 (16.7%) patients died of other causes. Two (16.7%) patients developed an anastomotic leak (treated conservatively) and one (8.3%) patient a chylothorax (which required a surgical treatment). The mean operative time of uniportal VATS esophagectomy was 104.67±20.66 min. Mean number of thoracic nodes removed was 10.44±3.94. Post-operative hospitalization was 15.73±14.29 days (median of 9 days). The mean level of pain was 1.92±0.90 in first postoperative day with a duration of 2.25±1.54 days. Cosmetic result was 2.42±0.79 on a 3-point scale.
conclusionsUniportal VATS esophagectomy seems to be a safe, feasible and effective alternative to multiportal VATS in terms of operative time, postoperative mortality, hospital stay and oncological outcomes. Less postoperative pain and better cosmetic results seem to be some advantages in favor of Uniportal VATS, however further studies with longer follow-up are claimed.
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.