ArticleSurgery today2019
Risk factors associated with increased drainage volumes of chest tubes after transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.
Article in Surgery today, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Drainology: Leveraging research in chest-drain management to enhance recovery after cardiothoracic surgery.JTCVS techniques · 2024Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeProlonged chest drain placement can extend the postoperative hospital stay after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer (EC) patients. This study aimed to identify whether or not the risk factors associated with this prolonged chest tube placement are clinically important.
methodsA total of 138 patients who underwent subtotal esophagectomy for thoracic EC were retrospectively analyzed. Using the 75th percentile of the total drainage volume of chest tubes as a cutoff value, the high-output (HO; n = 35) and low-output (LO; n = 103) groups were compared in terms of the clinicopathological parameters.
resultsThe median durations of right and left chest tube placement were 6 and 9 days, respectively, with a median total drainage volume of 2692 ml. When compared with the LO group, the HO group was significantly associated with male gender, a subcutaneous route for reconstruction, blood transfusion, higher morbidity, and prolonged chest drainage and postoperative hospital stays. A multivariable analysis further identified blood loss (p = 0.03) and the subcutaneous route for reconstruction (p = 0.04) as independent risk factors for increased chest tube drainage after esophagectomy.
conclusionBlood loss and the subcutaneous route of reconstruction are risk factors for increased drainage of chest tube after esophagectomy for EC.
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.