ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Endoscopic recanalization of complete esophageal obstruction.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of surgeon specialty and technique on outcomes after esophageal dilation: a systematic review.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Pooled it
- Ultrathin Endoscope-Assisted Wire-Guided Dilation for Radiation-Induced Esophageal Obstruction: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- The Evolving Paradigm of Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma: Current Insights, Emerging Therapies, and Future Directions.Journal of cancer science and clinical therapeutics · 2025Article
- EUS-guided esophageal lumen restoration in a young patient with complete luminal obstruction (with video).Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsComplete esophageal obstruction (CEO) is a rare complication after radiochemotherapy that dramatically impairs quality of life. Within this study, we assessed the outcome of two different endoscopic techniques for lumen restoration in patients with CEO.
methods17 patients were included. Esophageal recanalization was performed in an antegrade approach (Group A) or through combined antegrade and retrograde recanalization and dilatation (CARD, Group B). Technical success, complications, and dysphagia development during follow-up (FU) were compared between the groups.
resultsIn Group A (n = 6), esophageal recanalization was performed by a single endoscopist with a median duration of 47 min. In two patients, antegrade recanalization led to formation of a false lumen (i.e., submucosal tunneling) followed by mediastinitis. In Group B, 21 CARD procedures were performed in 11 patients with a technical success rate of 100%. Procedure time was longer compared to Group A; however, no intra- or postprocedural complications were observed in Group B.
conclusionsIn our experience and cohort, CARD was a successful procedure for recanalization of CEO, which exhibits a more favorable safety profile over antegrade recanalization. Further randomized studies to evaluate the treatment of CEO with CARD are needed.
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.