Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37391512›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023

Clinical utility and applicability of the,Esophagus Complication Consensus Group' (ECCG) classification of anastomotic leakage following hybrid Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

Isabel Bartella, Stefanie Brunner, Lars M Schiffmann, Petra Schiller, Thomas Schmidt, Hans F Fuchs, Seung Chon, Christiane J Bruns, Wolfgang Schröder

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Treatment of anastomotic leakage following Ivor Lewis esophagectomy-10 year experience from a Nordic center.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2024
    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

9 authors.

Isabel BartellaDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Stefanie BrunnerDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Lars M SchiffmannDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Petra SchillerInstitute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Thomas SchmidtDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Hans F FuchsDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Seung ChonDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Christiane J BrunsDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Wolfgang SchröderDepartment of General, Visceral, Cancer and Transplantation Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 32, 50937, Cologne, Germany. wolfgang.schroeder@uk-koeln.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnastomotic leakage (AL) remains the leading surgical complication following Ivor-Lewis (IL) esophagectomy. Different treatment options of AL exist but outcome is difficult to compare due to a lack of generally accepted classifications. This retrospective study was conducted to analyze the clinical significance of a recently proposed classification based on the management of AL. PATIENTS AND

methodsA cohort of 954 consecutive patients undergoing hybrid IL esophagectomy (laparoscopy/thoracotomy) was analysed. AL was defined according to the,Esophagus Complication Consensus Group' (ECCG) criteria depending on its treatment: conservative (AL type I), interventional endoscopic (AL type II), and surgical (AL type III). Primary outcome was single or multiple organ failure (Clavien-Dindo IVA/B) associated with AL.

resultsOverall morbidity was 63.0% and 8.8% (84/954 patients) developed an AL postoperatively. Three patients (3.5%) had an AL type I, 57 patients (67.9%) an AL type II and 24 patients (28.6%) an AL type III. For patients managed surgically, AL was diagnosed significantly earlier (median days: AL type III: 2 vs AL type II: 6, p < 0.001). Associated organ failure (CD IVA/B) was significantly lower for AL type II as compared to AL type III (21.1% versus 45.8%, p < 0.0001). In-hospital mortality was 3.5% for AL type II and 8.3% for AL type III (p = 0.789). There was no difference for re-admission to ICU and overall length of hospital stay.

conclusionThe proposed ECCG classification is simply to apply and discriminates the post-treatment severity of AL but does not aid to implement a treatment algorithm.

Indexed as

Anastomotic LeakEsophagectomyConsensus Statements as TopicEsophagusHumansRetrospective StudiesEsophagusOncologyOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID37391512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.