ArticleThe Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2020
Current Issues in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.
Article in The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Field Versus Two-Field Lymphadenectomy in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: 3-Year Survival Outcomes of a Randomized Trial.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Trial
- Perioperative outcomes and survival of indocyanine green-guided minimally esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer: a retrospective comparison study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Unveiling Therapeutic Targets for Esophageal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Factors Affecting Blood Loss During Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy for Esophageal Carcinoma.Journal of chest surgery · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) was first introduced in the 1990s. Currently, it is a widely accepted surgical approach for the treatment of esophageal cancer, as it is an oncologically sound procedure; its advantages when compared to open procedures, including reduction in postoperative complications, reduction in the length of hospital stay, and improvement in quality of life, are well documented. However, debates are still ongoing about the safety and efficacy of MIE. The present review focuses on some of the current issues related to conventional MIE and robot-assisted MIE based on evidence from the current literature.
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.