Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32648175›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2021

Completely Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Versus Hybrid Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junctional Cancer: Clinical and Short-Term Oncological Outcomes.

Krashna Patel, Omar Abbassi, Cheuk Bong Tang, Bruno Lorenzi, Alexandros Charalabopoulos, Sritharan Kadirkamanathan, Naga Venkatesh Jayanthi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Esophagogastric Anastomosis: The Importance of Anchoring Sutures in Reducing Anastomotic Leak Rates.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Krashna PatelEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK. krashna@doctors.org.uk.
Omar AbbassiEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
Cheuk Bong TangEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
Bruno LorenziEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
Alexandros CharalabopoulosEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
Sritharan KadirkamanathanEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
Naga Venkatesh JayanthiEssex Upper GI, Regional Centre for Oesophagogastric Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
Broomfield Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMinimally invasive surgery for resectable esophageal and gastroesophageal junctional (GEJ) cancer significantly reduces morbidity when compared with open surgery, as is evident from published landmark trials. Comparison of outcomes between hybrid esophagectomy (HE) and completely minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) remains unclear.

objectiveWe aimed to ascertain whether CMIE is associated with less postoperative complications compared with HE without oncological compromise.

methodsAll consecutive two-stage HEs and CMIEs performed between 2016 and 2018 were included. All procedures were performed with an intrathoracic anastomosis. Primary clinical outcomes were pulmonary infective and overall complications within 30 days of surgery, while primary oncological outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at both 6 months and to date. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative variables and postoperative clinical parameters.

resultsOverall, 98 patients had CMIEs and 49 patients had HEs. There were no baseline differences between the two groups. Thirty-day postoperative pulmonary infection rates were lower in the CMIE group compared with the HE group (12.2% vs. 28.6%; p = 0.014), and 30-day overall postoperative complication rates were also lower following CMIE (35.7% vs. 59.2%; p = 0.007). OS and DFS were similar between the two groups at 6 months (p = 0.201 and p = 0.109, respectively).

conclusionsCMIE is associated with less pulmonary infective and overall postoperative complications compared with HE for resectable esophageal and GEJ cancer. No intergroup difference was observed regarding short-term survival and cancer recurrence in patients undergoing CMIE and HE. A randomized controlled trial comparing the two operative approaches is required to validate these findings.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID32648175
OpenAlexW3042131861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.