SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2023
Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy after neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of Neoadjuvant Therapy in Remodeling Surgical Approaches for Gastrointestinal Malignancies.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- Risk and management of adverse events in minimally invasive esophagectomy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNeoadjuvant therapy and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) are widely used in the comprehensive treatment of esophageal cancer. This study aimed to investigate the advantages of MIE for esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy.
methodsPublished clinical studies were reviewed and survival data and safety data were extracted. We compared the long-term survival and safety of MIE versus open esophagectomy after neoadjuvant surgery in a series of meta-analyses.
results6 retrospective studies were included. Overall, MIE could significantly improve the overall survival of patients with esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy compared with open esophagectomy [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.75, 0.98)]. Compared with open esophagectomy, MIE could significantly reduce intraoperative blood loss and operative time [mean difference (MD) = -40.28.78, 95% CI (- 62.98, - 17.58); MD = -28.78, 95% CI (- 42.48, - 15.07), respectively]. There was no significant difference in 30-day and 90-day mortality between MIE and open esophagectomy [odds ratio (OR) = 0.42, 95% CI (0.09, 2.01); OR 0.80, 95% CI (0.25, 2.60), respectively]. MIE could not significantly reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy and chylothorax [OR 0.70, 95% CI (0.37, 1.32); OR 1.43, 95% CI (0.33, 6.25); HR = 1.79, 95% CI (0.67, 4.75), respectively], but the incidence of pneumonia was significantly reduced [HR = 0.43, 95% CI (0.22, 0.82)]. In addition, the length of hospital stay and the incidence of total complications were significantly reduced after MIE [MD = -2.61, 95% CI (- 3.10, - 2.12); HR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.45, 0.98), respectively].
conclusionMIE after neoadjuvant therapy is effective and safe. Compared with open esophagectomy, MIE can improve the long-term survival and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications of esophageal cancer patients.
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.