ArticleFrontiers in surgery2023
Uniportal-VATS vs. open McKeown esophagectomy: Surgical and long-term oncological outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uniportal versus Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Learning curve and perioperative outcomes: a retrospective cohort study between synchronous and combined inflatable mediastinoscope-laparoscopic radical esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Comparative outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer undergoing single-port and four-port thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a single-center experience.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Long-Term Results of Single- and Multi-Incision Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: Experience of 348 Cases.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- May fascial blocks reduce chronic pain in Uniportal-VATS? Comment on "Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery versus open thoracotomy for chronic pain after surgery: a prospective cohort study".Journal of anesthesia · 2025Article
- Enhanced pain management improves CPTS outcomes.Journal of anesthesia · 2025Article
- 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
15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Till now there are very few reports about surgical results of Uniportal-VATS esophagectomy and no one about long-term outcomes. This study is the first comparing surgical and oncological outcomes of Uniportal-VATS with open McKeown esophagectomy, with the largest reported series and longest oncological follow-up. Methods: The prospectively collected clinical, surgical and oncological data of 75 patients, undergone McKeown esophagectomy at our Thoracic Surgery Department, from January 2012 to August 2022, were retrospectively analyzed. Nineteen patients underwent esophagectomy by thoracotomy and reconstruction according to McKeown technique while 56 by Uniportal-VATS approach. Gastric tubulization was performed totally laparoscopic or through a mini-laparatomic access and cervical anastomosis was made according to Orringer's technique. Results: The mean operative thoracic time was similar in both accesses (102.34 ± 15.21 min in Uniportal-VATS vs. 115.56 ± 23.12 min in open, Conclusions: Uniportal-VATS seems to be a safe, feasible and effective technique for performing McKeown esophagectomy, with equivalent surgical and long-term oncological results to standard thoracotomy, but with a faster and unharmed recovery, and a quite short learning curve.
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.