Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32513211›Full record

ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2020

Comparisons between minimally invasive and open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with cervical anastomosis: a retrospective study.

Zongjie Li, Canhui Liu, Yuanguo Liu, Sheng Yao, Biao Xu, Guohua Dong

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06147180 (Comparison of Long-term Survival and Quality of Life After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06147180 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Long-term Survival and Quality of Life After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: a Retrospective Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorQilu Hospital of Shandong UniversityRan2023 to 2026Enrolled1,474ConditionsEsophagus Cancer, Esophagectomy, Quality of Life, Survival
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zongjie LiDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210001, Jiangsu Province, China.
Canhui LiuDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210001, Jiangsu Province, China.
Yuanguo LiuDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210001, Jiangsu Province, China.
Sheng YaoDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210001, Jiangsu Province, China.
Biao XuDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210001, Jiangsu Province, China.
Guohua DongDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210001, Jiangsu Province, China. 392650278@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2808-0973
Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs an extensive surgery, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has advantages in reducing morbidity and improving quality of life for patients suffering from esophageal cancer. This study aims to investigate differences between MIE and open esophagectomy (OE) for considerations of the safety of procedures, rate of tumor resection, postoperative complications, and quality of life. This paper also tends to provide some references for MIE on esophageal cancer therapy.

methodsA retrospective data analysis was undertaken on 140 patients who either underwent MIE or OE for esophageal cancer with cervical anastomosis from March 2013 to May 2014 by our surgical team. Preoperative characteristics were analyzed for both groups. Differences in perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, lymph nodes retrieved, and R0-resection rate. Accordingly, a comparative analysis was conducted on complications namely anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, in-hospital mortality, and short-term (3 months) postoperative EORTC C30 Global health as well.

resultsA total of 140 patients (87 with MIE and 53 with OE) were enrolled and the two groups were homogeneous in terms of patient- and tumor-related data. There was no difference on postoperative ICU stay (21.15 ± 1.54 h vs 21.75 ± 1.68 h, p = 0.07) and R0-resection rate (100% vs 100%, p = 1.00). The operation time for MIE was significantly shorter (146.08 ± 17.35 min vs 200.34 ± 14.51 min, p <  0.0001), the intraoperative blood loss was remarkably saved (MIE vs OE, 83.91 ± 24.72 ml vs 174.53 ± 35.32 ml, P <  0.0001) and more lymph nodes were retrieved (MIE vs OE, 38.89 ± 4.31 vs 18.42 ± 3.66, P <  0.0001). There was no difference between the groups to postoperative complications and mortality. However, pulmonary infection in MIE was higher than in OE and the difference was not statistically significant (MIE vs OE, 20.75% vs 31.03%, P = 0.24). Complications such as in-hospital mortality and short-term (3 months) postoperative EORTC C30 Global health displayed no difference between both groups as well.

conclusionsThe number of lymph nodes and intraoperative blood loss were significantly ameliorated in MIE. A 4-5 cm longitudinal incision below the xiphoid process was made to create the gastric conduit under direct vision assisting in shortening the total operation time significantly.

Indexed as

AgedAnastomosis, SurgicalBlood Loss, SurgicalCarcinoma, Squamous CellEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyFemaleHumansLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeckOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsQuality of LifeCervical anastomosisEsophageal carcinomaMinimally invasive esophagectomyOpen esophagectomyRetrospective analysis

Identifiers

PMID32513211
PMCPMC7282040
OpenAlexW3033433828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.