SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2022
The influence of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy on postoperative pulmonary function in esophageal cancer patients: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Robot-assisted versus thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: long-term oncological and functional outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the clinical effect of inflatable mediastinoscopy synchronous laparoscopic radical resection of esophageal cancer: a comparative study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of esophageal cancer patients regarding pulmonary rehabilitation training.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic versus open abdominal lymph node dissection for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis.Surgery today · 2024Article
- Clinical implementation of minimally invasive esophagectomy.BMC surgery · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the influence of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and open esophagectomy (OE) on postoperative pulmonary function in patients with esophageal cancer.
methodsStudies about the influence of MIE and OE on postoperative pulmonary function in esophageal cancer patients were searched from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, CBM, and Wanfang Data from inception to March 18, 2021. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3.
resultsThis analysis included eight studies, enrolling 264 patients who underwent MIE and 257 patients who underwent OE. The meta-analysis results showed that the MIE group had a higher outcome regarding the percent predicted vital capacity (%VC), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV
conclusionCompared with OE, MIE has a more protective effect on postoperative pulmonary function. However, due to the small number of included literature and all cohort studies, this finding needs to be validated with larger samples and higher quality RCT studies.
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.