ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Clinical comparative study of glasses-free 3D and 2D thoracoscopic surgery in minimally invasive esophagectomy.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Therapeutic Effectiveness of 3-dimensional Video-assisted Thoracic Surgery in the Management of Oesophageal Cancer.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Thoracic duct identification using three-dimensional thoracoscope versus indocyanine green fluorescence during minimally invasive esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of glasses-free three-dimensional (3D) thoracoscopic surgery in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Methods: The clinical data of 98 patients, including 81 men and 17 women aged 45-77 years, with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy from January 2017 to December 2019 [3 years, with clinical follow-up time: 1 year~4 years (2017.01-2020.12)] were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to different surgical methods including a glasses-free 3D thoracoscopic group (G-3D group: 38 patients) and a two-dimesional (2D) thoracoscopic group (2D group: 60 patients). The clinical outcome of the two groups were compared. Results: The operation time of the thoracoscopic part in the G-3D group was significantly shorter than that in the 2D group (P<0.05). The total number of lymph node dissection in the G-3D group was more than that in the 2D group (P<0.05). The thoracic indwelling time, postoperative hospital stay, severe pulmonary infection, arrhythmia, anastomotic leakage, chylothorax, and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury were not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05). There was also no significant difference between the two groups on the progression-free survival (P>0.05). Conclusion: Glasses-free 3D thoracoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer is a safe and effective surgical procedure. Compared with 2D thoracoscopic MIE, glasses-free 3D thoracoscopic MIE for esophageal cancer has higher safety, more lymph node dissection, and higher operation efficiency through the optimized surgical operations. We believe that glasses-free 3D thoracoscopy for MIE is worthy of clinical promotion.
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.