Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33708437›Full record

ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2021

The assessment of intraoperative technique-related risk factors and the treatment of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy: a narrative review.

Chuangui Chen, Hongjing Jiang

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Early versus the traditional start of oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Evolution of a minimally invasive oesophagectomy program - effective complication management is key.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chuangui ChenDepartment of Minimally Invasive Esophagus Surgery, Key Laboratory of Prevention and Therapy, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Hongjing JiangDepartment of Minimally Invasive Esophagus Surgery, Key Laboratory of Prevention and Therapy, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China.
Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anastomotic leakage, including cervical anastomotic leakage and intrathoracic anastomotic leakage, is a serious complication of esophageal cancer and a leading cause of death after esophagectomy. In fact, anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy can be caused by numerous factors in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods. Intraoperative technique-related risk factors, including surgical methods, anastomosis sites, anastomosis methods, the type of gastric tube, and reconstruction routes, are the key causes of its occurrence. Anastomotic leakage treatments include both surgical and non-surgical treatments, while surgical treatment has high risks, many complications, and high mortality. Actually, non-surgical methods including naso-leakage drainage, stent, negative pressure therapy, and so on, are also very critical in the treatment of anastomotic leakage. So, the selection of correct and appropriate treatment methods plays an important role in alleviating the suffering of patients, shortening hospitalization time, and reducing mortality. This study undertook a systematic review in which data in the PubMed database were searched and analyzed to assess the safety and efficacy of surgical technique-related factors in esophagectomy, and appropriate treatment of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. In conclusion, gastric tube, posterior mediastinal route and stapled anastomosis are safe among esophagectomy surgical techniques, and non-surgical treatment of anastomotic leakage such as naso-leakage drainage is feasible in the majority of cases.

Indexed as

anastomotic leakageEsophageal canceresophagectomyrisk factortreatment

Identifiers

PMID33708437
PMCPMC7944150
OpenAlexW3135171590

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.