ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2019
Early Quality of Life Outcomes After Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy.
Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 5 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Mapping Review of Core Outcome Reporting in Surgical Research for Oesophageal Cancer.Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative analysis of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical practice guidelines for esophagogastric junction cancer: Upper GI Oncology Summit 2023.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024Guideline
- 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
- Postoperative short-term outcomes of minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Thoracic cancer · 2020Pooled it
- Tegileridine versus Oliceridine for Acute Postoperative Pain Management in Patients After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Preliminary Randomized Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Trial
- Review
- Clinical Trials Update in Resectable Esophageal Cancer.Cancers · 2026Review
- Decreasing Complications After Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy: Is a Totally Minimally Invasive Approach the Solution?Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Current Status and Future Applications of Robotic Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Enhanced short-term outcomes after full robotic-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis procedure compared to the hybrid approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: experience at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.Mini-invasive surgery · 2025Article
- Patient-reported outcomes following esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- Article
- Minimally invasive surgery for gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: Current evidence and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Review
- Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Upper GI Malignancies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- [Robotic esophageal surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Comparison of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: A propensity-matched study from a single high-volume institution.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2023Article
- Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery?Updates in surgery · 2023Review
- The Implementation of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: A Step Toward Better Outcomes?Oncology and therapy · 2022Review
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
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive esophagectomy may improve some perioperative outcomes over open approaches; effects on quality of life are less clear.
methodsA prospective trial of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and open esophagectomy was initiated, measuring quality of life via the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal and Brief Pain Inventory. Mixed generalized linear models assessed associations between quality of life scores over time and by surgery type.
resultsIn total, 106 patients underwent open esophagectomy; 64 underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (98% RAMIE). The groups did not differ in age, sex, comorbidities, histologic subtype, stage, or induction treatment (P = .42 to P > .95). Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal scores were lower at 1 month (P < .001), returned to near baseline by 4 months, and did not differ between groups (P = .83). Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity (P = .007) and interference (P = .004) were lower for RAMIE. RAMIE had lower estimated blood loss (250 vs 350 cm
conclusionsRAMIE is associated with lower immediate postoperative pain severity and interference and decreased pulmonary and infectious complications. Ongoing data accrual will assess mid-term and long-term outcomes in this cohort.
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.