ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2019
Outcomes after total robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched comparison with hybrid robotic esophagectomy.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning curve for the abdominal procedure in total robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with simultaneous cervical approach: an initial experience.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Total Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for De Novo Esophageal Cancer after Liver Transplantation: The Potential of Robotic Surgery in a Complex Posttransplant Case.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2025Article
- Total RAMIE with three-field lymph node dissection by a simultaneous two-team approach using a new docking method for esophageal cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- A comparative assessment of ACS NSQIP-predicted and actual surgical risk outcomes of robotic transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma resection at a high volume institution.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Tackling complex thoracic surgical operations with robotic solutions: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- Hybrid laparoscopic versus fully robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: an international propensity-score matched analysis of perioperative outcome.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) vs. hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy: propensity score matched short-term outcome analysis of a European high-volume center.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Current status of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: what is the real benefit?Surgery today · 2022Review
- Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy - a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Article
- Totally Robotic Esophagectomy.Journal of chest surgery · 2021Article
- Robotic esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymphadenectomy using four robotic arms alone in esophageal and esophagogastric cancer (RETML-4): a prospective feasibility study.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2021Article
- Long-Term, Health-Related Quality of Life after Open and Robot-Assisted Ivor-Lewis Procedures-A Propensity Score-Matched Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Robotic surgery facilitates complex minimally invasive operations.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- Current Issues in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2020Article
- Favorable clinical outcomes of total robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- Robotic gastric mobilization in robotic minimally invasive esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- Current status of esophageal cancer treatment.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE).
methodsTotal of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included. T-RAMIE was defined as esophagectomy performed robotically in both the thoracic and abdominal cavities. Laparotomy was used instead of the robotic procedure in H-RAMIE. T-RAMIE was performed in 144 patients (63.4%), and propensity score matching produced 49 matched pairs from each group. Early and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared.
resultsT-RAMIE was mostly performed for upper or mid-thoracic squamous cell carcinoma (n=119, 82.6%) and cervical anastomosis, and three-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 113 (78.5%) and 54 (37.5%) patients, respectively. One laparotomy conversion was necessary because of severe obesity. The propensity-matched analysis demonstrated that T-RAMIE showed a comparable 90-day mortality rate with H-RAMIE (0%
conclusionsIn this matched analysis, T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE showed comparable early outcomes and long-term survival. The low tendencies of early mortality and conversion rate of T-RAMIE suggest that it might be a safe alternative to open stomach mobilization and abdominal lymphadenectomy.
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.