ArticleScientific reports2023
Thoracolaparoscopic radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer based on the mesoesophageal theory.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy With Total Mesoesophageal Excision and Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Safety and short-term oncological outcomes of multimodal modified overlap esophagojejunostomy in total laparoscopic total gastrectomy for elderly patients.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Machine learning and the nomogram as the accurate tools for predicting postoperative malnutrition risk in esophageal cancer patients.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Short-term efficacy of additional laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To explore the feasibility of mesangium or membrane anatomy theory in thoracolaparoscopic radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, 98 patients with esophageal cancer were enrolled including 45 patients in the mesoesophageal esophagectomy group and 53 patients in the non-mesoesophageal esophagectomy group. Thoracolaparoscopic radical esophagecotmy was technically successful in all patients. Compared the non-mesoesophageal group, the mesoesophageal group had significantly (P < 0.05) shorter surgical duration (211.9 ± 42.0 min vs. 282.0 ± 44.5 min), less blood loss during the procedure (68.9 ± 45.9 ml vs. 167.0 ± 91.4 ml), more harvested lymph nodes (25.9 ± 6.3 vs. 21.8 ± 7.3), shorter hospital stay after surgery (10.5 ± 2.5 d vs. 12.5 ± 4.2 d), shorter fasting time or quicker postoperative feeding time (7.3 ± 1.2 d vs. 9.5 ± 3.9 d), and quicker removal of the thoracic drainage tube after surgery (7.7 ± 2.0 d vs. 9.2 ± 4.1 d). The overall incidence of postoperative complications was 46.7% (21/45) in the mesoesophageal group, which was significantly (P = 0.02) fewer than that (69.8% or 37/53) of the non-mesoesophageal group (P = 0.020). During follow-up 20.6 ± 4.3 or 20.8 ± 3.4 months after esophagectomy, liver metastasis occurred in 1 case and lung metastasis in 1 in the mesoesophageal group, whereas liver metastasis occurred in 2 cases, mediastinal metastasis in 2, and anastomotic recurrence in 1 in the non-mesoesophageal group. The mesoesophageal group had significantly better physical function (81.9 ± 7.3 vs. 78.3 ± 7.6), social function (65.1 ± 7.1 vs. 56.2 ± 18.2), global health status (65.3 ± 10.1 vs. 58.7 ± 12.4), and pain improvement (29.5 ± 9.5 vs. 35.6 ± 10.6). The overall survival rate was 82.2% (37/45) in the mesoesophageal group and 71.7% (38/53) in the non-mesoesophageal group (P = 0.26). The disease-free survival rate was 77.8% (35/45) for the mesoesophageal group and 62.3% (33/53) for the non-mesoesophageal group (P = 0.13). In conclusion:, the mesangium or membrane anatomy theory can be used safely and effectively to guide thoracolaparoscopic radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, with advantages of shorter surgical time, less bleeding, more lymph node harvest, fewer complications, and faster postoperative recovery.
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.