ArticleSurgery today2021
Thoracoscopic repair of congenital diaphragmatic hernia in neonates: findings of a multicenter study in Japan.
Article in Surgery today, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Historical evolution of thoracoscopic repair for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: an era-based systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Thoracoscopic versus open congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis by the Pediatric Surgery Meta-Analysis Study Group (PESMA).Pediatric surgery international · 2026Pooled it
- Comprehensive meta-analysis of surgical procedure for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: thoracoscopic versus open repair.Pediatric surgery international · 2024Pooled it
- Evolution of minimally invasive surgery for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a nationwide multicenter retrospective cohort analysis in Japan.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
- Intraoperative surgical complications of open surgery for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a multicenter, observational study in Japan.Pediatric surgery international · 2024Observational
- Surgical management of the diaphragmatic defect in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a contemporary review.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2024Review
- Tension-free thoracoscopic repair of congenital diaphragmatic hernia combined with a percutaneous extracorporeal closure technique: how to do it.Surgery today · 2023Article
- A predictive scoring system for small diaphragmatic defects in infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia.Pediatric surgery international · 2022Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on congenital diaphragmatic hernia patients: a single-center retrospective study.Pediatric surgery international · 2022Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: Report of a Multicenter Study in Japan.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Congenital diaphragmatic hernia.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022Review
- Unsolved problems in CDH follow-up.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Recurrence of Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: Risk Factors, Management, and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Thoracoscopic surgery for congenital diaphragmatic hernia in neonates: Should it be the first choice?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe compared the efficacy of thoracoscopic repair (TR) with that of open repair (OR) for neonatal congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH).
methodsThe subjects of this multicenter retrospective cohort study were 524 infants with left-sided isolated CDH, diagnosed prenatally, and treated at one of 15 participating hospitals in Japan between 2006 and 2018. The outcomes of infants who underwent TR and those who underwent OR were compared, applying propensity score matching.
resultsDuring the study period, 57 infants underwent TR and 467 underwent OR. Ten of the infants who underwent TR required conversion to OR for technical difficulties and these patients were excluded from the analysis. The survival rate at 180 days was similar in both groups (TR 98%; OR 93%). Recurrence developed after TR in 3 patients and after OR in 15 patients (TR 7%, OR 3%, p = 0.40). The propensity score was calculated using the following factors related to relevance of the surgical procedure: prematurity (p = 0.1), liver up (p < 0.01), stomach position (p < 0.01), and RL shunt (p = 0.045). After propensity score matching, the multivariate analysis adjusted for severity classification and age at surgical treatment revealed a significantly shorter hospital stay (odds ratio 0.50) and a lower incidence of chronic lung disease (odds ratio 0.39) in the TR group than in the OR group.
conclusionsTR can be performed safely for selected CDH neonates with potentially better outcomes than OR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33877452What 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.