ArticleBJS open2019
Population-based study of anastomotic stricture rates after minimally invasive and open oesophagectomy for cancer.
Article in BJS open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors for and treatment of anastomotic strictures after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Endoscopic Management for Post-Surgical Complications after Resection of Esophageal Cancer.Cancers · 2022Review
- Real-time fluorescence image-guided gastrointestinal oncologic surgery: Towards a new era.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- Thirty years of esophageal cancer surgery in Oulu University Hospital.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Article
- Quantitative fluorescence-guided perfusion assessment of the gastric conduit to predict anastomotic complications after esophagectomy.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The population-based incidence of anastomotic stricture after minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) and open oesophagectomy (OO) is not known. The aim of this study was to compare rates of anastomotic stricture requiring dilatation after the two approaches in an unselected cohort using nationwide data from Finland and Sweden. Methods: All patients who had MIO or OO for oesophageal cancer between 2007 and 2014 were identified from nationwide registries in Finland and Sweden. Outcomes were the overall rate of anastomotic stricture and need for single or repeated (3 or more) dilatations for stricture within the first year after surgery. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals, adjusted for age, sex, co-morbidity, histology, stage, year, country, hospital volume, length of hospital stay and readmissions. Results: Some 239 patients underwent MIO and 1430 had an open procedure. The incidence of strictures requiring one dilatation was 16·7 per cent, and that for strictures requiring three or more dilatations was 6·6 per cent. The HR for strictures requiring one dilatation was not increased after MIO compared with that after OO (HR 1·19, 95 per cent c.i. 0·66 to 2·12), but was threefold higher for repeated dilatations (HR 3·25, 1·43 to 7·36). Of 18 strictures following MIO, 14 (78 per cent) occurred during the first 2 years after initiating this approach. Conclusion: The need for endoscopic anastomotic dilatation after oesophagectomy was common, and the need for repeated dilatation was higher after MIO than following OO. The increased risk after MIO may reflect a learning curve.
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.