ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2022
Efficacy of thoracotomy and thoracoscopic-assisted esophageal surgery in conversion and salvage surgeries: a retrospective study.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine for Intercostal Nerve Block in Elderly Patients Undergoing Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy: A randomized Double-Blinded Trial.Journal of pain research · 2025Trial
- Effect of totally thoracoscopic esophagectomy on postoperative complications and serum inflammatory factors in patients with early esophageal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Risk Factors of Esophageal Fistula Associated with Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer.International journal of general medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe esophagus has no serosa; therefore, esophageal cancer may quickly invade its adjacent organs. In recent years, reports of conversion surgery (CS) and salvage surgery (SS) have described resection of esophageal cancer previously considered unresectable, with the addition of intensive preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Currently, there is no established method for determining whether tumor excision is possible. Additionally, differences in surgical approaches between facilities may influence outcome after resection. However, the option for resection is considered a significant factor in determining a patient's prognosis.
methodsPatients who were diagnosed with advanced-stage (T3 or higher) squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus and subsequently underwent resection with CS or SS were included in the study. Resection was performed through a small thoracotomy using a thoracoscope. Clinicopathologic factors, such as complete resection rate (R0) and prognosis, were investigated.
resultsA total of 49 surgeries were conducted: 39 CS and 10 SS cases. The male-to-female ratio was 37:12. R0:R1:R2 equals 42:3:4, and the R0 resection rate was 85.7%. The 5-year survival rates for CS and SS cases were 69.2% and 32.1%, respectively. The 5-year survival rates for R0, R1, and R2 resections were 63.4%, 0.0%, and 25.0%, and those for R0 and R1 + 2 resections were 63.4% and 14.3%, respectively, indicating that the prognosis for R0 resection cases was significantly better (P = 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). Regarding chemotherapy for CS, 29 patients received 5-FU and cisplatin therapy, whereas 10 patients received 5-FU, cisplatin, and docetaxel (DCF) therapy. After 2015, the ratio of DCF was significantly high, and the R0 resection rate was 100% in patients who received DCF therapy.
conclusionsIn this study, a satisfactory R0 rate was achieved using the magnifying effect of the thoracoscope while ensuring safety during thoracotomy.
trial registrationThis was a single-center cohort study wherein clinical data were retrospectively registered. This study was approved by the Chiba Cancer Center review board (H29-262). All procedures adhered to the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and its later amendments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.