Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34830988›Full record

ReviewCancers2021

Surgical Therapy of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma-Current Standards and Future Perspectives.

Wolfgang Schröder, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Daan M Voeten, Christian A Gutschow, Hans F Fuchs, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Textbook outcomes in oesophageal resections from an evolving thoracic surgical unit.Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Wolfgang SchröderDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, 50937 Cologne, Germany.
Suzanne S GisbertzCancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9655-7601
Daan M VoetenCancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4292-6795
Christian A GutschowDepartment of General and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
Hans F FuchsDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, 50937 Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4764-8050
Mark I van Berge HenegouwenCancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8689-3134
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLUniversity of Cologne · DEUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transthoracic esophagectomy is currently the predominant curative treatment option for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. The majority of carcinomas present as locally advanced tumors requiring multimodal strategies with either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy alone. Minimally invasive, including robotic, techniques are increasingly applied with a broad spectrum of technical variations existing for the oncological resection as well as gastric reconstruction. At the present, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is the preferred technique of reconstruction (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). With standardized surgical procedures, a complete resection of the primary tumor can be achieved in almost 95% of patients. Even in expert centers, postoperative morbidity remains high, with an overall complication rate of 50-60%, whereas 30- and 90-day mortality are reported to be <2% and <6%, respectively. Due to the complexity of transthoracic esophagetomy and its associated morbidity, esophageal surgery is recommended to be performed in specialized centers with an appropriate caseload yet to be defined. In order to reduce postoperative morbidity, the selection of patients, preoperative rehabilitation and postoperative fast-track concepts are feasible strategies of perioperative management. Future directives aim to further centralize esophageal services, to individualize surgical treatment for high-risk patients and to implement intraoperative imaging modalities modifying the oncological extent of resection and facilitating surgical reconstruction.

Indexed as

esophageal adenocarcinomaminimally invasive (robotic) techniques: perioperative managementpatient selectionsurgical outcometransthoracic esophagectomy

Identifiers

PMID34830988
PMCPMC8616112
OpenAlexW3216899565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.