ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Endoscopic vacuum therapy versus self-expandable metal stent for treatment of anastomotic leaks < 30 mm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a matched case-control study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stents and Emerging Alternatives in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Transforming Gastrointestinal Diagnosis with Molecular Endoscopy: Challenges and Opportunities.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- The Endoscopic Management of Anastomotic Strictures After Esophagogastric Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of Emerging Approaches Beyond Endoscopic Dilation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Microbiota profiling in esophageal diseases: Novel insights into molecular staining and clinical outcomes.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- VAC-Stent in the Treatment of Post-Esophagectomy Anastomotic Leaks: A New "Kid on the Block" Who Marries the Best of Old Techniques-A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- The Dual Lens of Endoscopy and Histology in the Diagnosis and Management of Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders-A Comprehensive Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Triple-S Advantage of Endoscopic Management in Gastrointestinal Surgery Complications: Safe, Successful, and Savings-Driven.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Endoscopic vacuum therapy: pitfalls, tips and tricks, insights, and perspectives.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Review
- Precision Endoscopy in Peroral Myotomies for Motility Disorders of the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: Current Insights and Prospective Avenues-A Comprehensive Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Imaging in Gastroparesis: Exploring Innovative Diagnostic Approaches, Symptoms, and Treatment.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManagement of anastomotic leaks after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy remains a challenge. Although intracavitary endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has shown great efficacy for large dehiscences, the optimal management of smaller leaks has not been standardized. This study aims to compare EVT versus self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) in the treatment of leaks < 30 mm in size, due to the lack of current data on this topic.
methodsPatients undergoing EVT (cases) or SEMS (controls) between May 2017 and July 2022 for anastomotic leaks < 3 cm following oncologic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were enrolled. Controls were matched in a 1:1 ratio based on age (± 3 years), BMI (± 3 kg/m
resultsCases (n = 22) and controls (n = 22) showed no difference in baseline characteristics and leak size, as per matching at enrollment. No differences were detected between the two groups in terms of time from surgery to endoscopic treatment (p = 0.11) or total number of procedures per patient (p = 0.05). Remarkably, the two groups showed comparable results in terms of leaks resolution (90.9% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.11). The number of procedures per patient was not significant between the two cohorts (p = 0.05). The most frequent complication in the SEMS group was migration (15.3% of procedures).
conclusionEVT and SEMS seem to have similar efficacy outcomes in the treatment of anastomotic defects < 30 mm after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. However, larger studies are needed to corroborate these findings.
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.