Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35683605›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

The Impact of Perioperative Fluid Balance on Postoperative Complications after Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Yuto Kubo, Koji Tanaka, Makoto Yamasaki, Kotaro Yamashita, Tomoki Makino, Takuro Saito, Kazuyoshi Yamamoto, Tsuyoshi Takahashi, Yukinori Kurokawa, Masaaki Motoori and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Epidurals in esophagectomy: end of an era?Journal of thoracic disease · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yuto KuboDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Koji TanakaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Makoto YamasakiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Kotaro YamashitaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Tomoki MakinoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Takuro SaitoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Kazuyoshi YamamotoDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Tsuyoshi TakahashiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Yukinori KurokawaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Masaaki MotooriDepartment of Surgery, Osaka General Medical Center, Osaka 558-8558, Japan.
Yutaka KimuraDepartment of Surgery, Kindai University Nara Hospital, Nara 630-0293, Japan.
Kiyokazu NakajimaDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Hidetoshi EguchiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Yuichiro DokiDepartment of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
Osaka University · JPKindai University · JPOsaka City General Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerioperative fluid balance is an important indicator in the management of esophageal cancer patients who undergo esophagectomy. However, the association between perioperative fluid balance and postoperative complications after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) remains unclear.

methodsThis study included 115 patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell cancer who underwent MIE between January 2018 and January 2020. We retrospectively evaluated the association between perioperative fluid balance from during surgery to postoperative day (POD) 2, and postoperative complications.

resultsThe patients were divided into lower group and higher group based on the median fluid balance during surgery and at POD 1 and POD 2. We found that the higher group at POD 1 (≥3000 mL) was the most important indicator of postoperative complications, such as acute pneumonia within 7 days after surgery, and anastomotic leakage (

conclusionThis study showed that fluid overload at POD 1 had a negative influence on postoperative complications in patients with esophageal cancer. The fluid balance must be strictly controlled during the early postoperative management of patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.

Indexed as

esophageal canceresophagectomyfluid balancefluid overloadpostoperative complicationsurgery

Identifiers

PMID35683605
PMCPMC9181193
OpenAlexW4281727783

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.