Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34645084›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2022

Endoscopic Management of Anastomotic Leakage after Esophageal Surgery: Ten Year Analysis in a Tertiary University Center.

Nader El-Sourani, Sorin Miftode, Maximilian Bockhorn, Alexander Arlt, Christian Meinhardt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nader El-SouraniDepartment for General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital, Klinikum Oldenburg AöR, Germany.
Sorin MiftodeDepartment for General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital, Klinikum Oldenburg AöR, Germany.
Maximilian BockhornDepartment for General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital, Klinikum Oldenburg AöR, Germany.
Alexander ArltDepartment for Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology, University Hospital, Klinikum Oldenburg AöR, Germany.
Christian MeinhardtDepartment for Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology, University Hospital, Klinikum Oldenburg AöR, Germany.
Klinikum Oldenburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsAnastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery remains a feared complication. During the last decade, management of this complication changed from surgical revision to a more conservative and endoscopic approach. However, the treatment remains controversial as the indications for conservative, endoscopic, and surgical approaches remain non-standardized.

methodsBetween 2010 and 2020, all patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for underlying malignancy were included in this study. The data of 28 patients diagnosed with anastomotic leak were further analyzed.

resultsAmong 141 patients who underwent resection, 28 (19.9%) developed an anastomotic leak, eight (28.6%) of whom died. Thirteen patients were treated with endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT), seven patients with self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) four patients with primary surgery, one patient with a hemoclip, and three patients were treated conservatively. EVT achieved closure in 92.3% of the patients with a large defect and no EVT-related complications. SEMS therapy was successful in clinically stable patients with small defect sizes.

conclusionEVT can be successfully applied in the treatment of anastomotic leakage in critically ill patients, while SEMS should be limited to clinically stable patients with a small defect size. Surgery is only warranted in patients with sepsis with graft necrosis.

Indexed as

Anastomotic leakEndoluminal vacuum therapyEsophagusIntrathoracicSelf-expanding metal stents

Identifiers

PMID34645084
PMCPMC8831416
OpenAlexW3207255407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.