Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36444286›Full record

ArticleSurgery open science2023

Consequences of anastomotic leaks after minimally invasive esophagectomy: A single-center experience.

Grigor S Simitian, David J Hall, Glen Leverson, Entela B Lushaj, Erik E Lewis, Kelsey A Musgrove, Daniel P McCarthy, James D Maloney

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgery open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Grigor S SimitianDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
David J HallDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Glen LeversonDepartment of Surgery, Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Entela B LushajDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Erik E LewisDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Kelsey A MusgroveDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Daniel P McCarthyDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
James D MaloneyDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, H4/358 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, United States of America.
Highland Community College - Illinois · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Anastomotic leak (AL) after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a well-described source of morbidity for patients undergoing surgical treatment of esophageal neoplasm. With improved early recognition and endoscopic management techniques, the long-term impact remains unclear. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent MIE for esophageal neoplasm between January 2015 and June 2021 at a single institution. Cohorts were stratified by development of AL and subsequent management. Baseline demographics, perioperative data, and post-operative outcomes were examined. Results: During this period, 172 MIEs were performed, with 35 of 172 (20.3%) complicated by an AL. Perioperative factors independently associated with AL were post-operative blood transfusion (leak rate 52.9% versus 16.8%; p = 0.0017), incompleteness of anastomotic rings (75.0% vs 19.1%; p = 0.027), and receiving neoadjuvant therapy (18.5% vs 30.8%; p < 0.0001). Inferior short-term outcomes associated with AL included number of esophageal dilations in the first post-operative year (1.40 vs 0.46, p = 0.0397), discharge disposition to a location other than home (22.9% vs 8.8%, p = 0.012), length of hospital stay (17.7 days vs 9.6 days; p = 0.002), and time until jejunostomy tube removal (134 days vs 79 days; p = 0.0023). There was no significant difference in overall survival between patients with or without an AL at 1 year (79% vs 83%) or 5 years (50% vs 47%) (overall log rank p = 0.758). Conclusions: In this large single-center series of MIEs, AL was associated with inferior short-term outcomes including hospital length of stay, discharge disposition other than to home, and need for additional endoscopic procedures, without an accompanying impact on 1-year or 5-year survival. Key message: In this large, single-center series of minimally invasive esophagectomies, anastomotic leak was associated with worse short-term outcomes including hospital length of stay, discharge disposition other than to home, and need for additional endoscopic procedures, but was not associated with worse long-term survival. The significant association between neoadjuvant therapy and decreased leak rates is difficult to interpret, given the potential for confounding factors, thus careful attention to modifiable pre- and peri-operative patient factors associated with anastomotic leak is warranted.

Indexed as

Anastomotic leakEsophageal cancerMinimally invasiveOutcomesRisk factor

Identifiers

PMID36444286
PMCPMC9700313
OpenAlexW4309649414

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.