Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34992806›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021

Minimally invasive esophagectomy learning curves with different types of background experience.

Olli Helminen, Joonas H Kauppila, Henna Saviaro, Fredrik Yannopoulos, Sanna Meriläinen, Vesa Koivukangas, Heikki Huhta, Johanna Mrena, Juha Saarnio, Eero Sihvo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  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. Implementation of Multimodality Therapy and Minimally Invasive Surgery: Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Gastric Cancer Surgery in Medium-Volume Center.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    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

10 authors.

Olli HelminenSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Joonas H KauppilaSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Henna SaviaroSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Fredrik YannopoulosSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Sanna MeriläinenSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Vesa KoivukangasSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Heikki HuhtaSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Johanna MrenaDepartment of Surgery, Central Finland Central Hospital, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Juha SaarnioSurgery Research Unit, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Eero SihvoDepartment of Surgery, Central Finland Central Hospital, Jyväskylä, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMinimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex procedure with learning associated morbidity. The aim was to evaluate the learning curve for MIE focusing on short-term outcomes in two settings: (I) experienced MIE surgeon in new hospital (Hospital 1); (II) surgeons experienced with open esophagectomy and minimally invasive surrogate surgery (Hospital 2).

methodsIn Hospital 1 and Hospital 2, on intent-to-treat basis number of MIEs were 132 and 57, respectively. The primary outcomes were major complications and anastomosis leaks. Secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, lymph node yield, hospital stay and 1-year mortality. Length of learning curves were analyzed with risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) method.

resultsIn Hospital 1, major complication and anastomosis leak rates were 9.8% and 4.5%, 22.8% and 12.3% in Hospital 2, respectively. In Hospital 1, complication and leak rates remained stable. In Hospital 2, improvement occurred after 34 cases in major complications and 29 cases in leaks. Of secondary outcomes, improvements were seen in Hospital 1 in operative time after 61, blood loss after 86, lymph node yield after 52, hospital stay after 19 and 1-year mortality after 24 cases. In Hospital 2, improvement occurred in operative time after 30, blood loss after 15, lymph node yield after 45, hospital stay after 50 and 1-year mortality after 15 cases.

conclusionsAccording to this study, learning phase of the individual surgeon determines the outcomes of MIE, not the institutional learning phase.

Indexed as

cumulative sum (CUSUM)esophageal cancerlearning curveMinimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE)surrogate surgery

Identifiers

PMID34992806
PMCPMC8662479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.