ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
The effect of time between procedures upon the proficiency gain period for minimally invasive esophagectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. 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.
- History and evidence for state of the art of lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer surgery.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2024Review
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
backgroundComplex surgical procedures including minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) are commonly associated with a period of proficiency gain. We aim to study the effect of reduced procedural interval upon the number of cases required to gain proficiency and adverse patient outcomes during this period from MIE.
methodsAll adult patients undergoing MIE for esophageal cancer in England from 2002 to 2012 were identified from Hospital Episode Statistics database. Outcomes evaluated included conversion rate from MIE to open esophagectomy, 30-day re-intervention, 30-day and 90-day mortality. Regression models investigated relationships between procedural interval and the number of cases and clinical outcomes during proficiency gain period.
resultsThe MIE dataset comprised of 1696 patents in total, with procedures carried out by 148 surgeons. Thresholds for procedural interval extracted from change-point modeling were found to be 60 days for conversion, 80 days for 30-day re-intervention, 80 days for 30-day mortality and 110 days for 90-day mortality. Procedural interval of MIEs did not influence the number of cases required for proficiency gain. However, reduced MIE procedural interval was associated with significant reductions in conversions (0.16 vs. 0.07; P < 0.001), re-interventions (0.15 vs. 0.09; P < 0.01), 30-day (0.12 vs. 0.05; P < 0.01) and 90-day (0.14 vs. 0.06; P < 0.01) mortality during the period of proficiency gain.
conclusionsThis national study has demonstrated that the introduction of MIE is associated with a period of proficiency gain and adverse patient outcomes. The absolute effect of this period of proficiency gain upon patient morbidity and mortality may be reduced by reduced procedural interval of MIE practice within specialized esophageal cancer centers.
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.