Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37416735›Full record

ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2023

What is the best reconstruction procedure after esophagectomy? A meta-analysis comparing posterior mediastinal and retrosternal approaches.

Eisuke Booka, Hiroya Takeuchi, Yoshifumi Morita, Yoshihiro Hiramatsu, Hirotoshi Kikuchi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Clinical outcomes of 23-mm circular stapled cervical anastomosis after esophagectomy.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Current advances and challenges in minimally invasive esophagectomy.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A nationwide survey on the safety of cricothyrotomy: a multicenter retrospective study in Japan.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eisuke BookaDepartment of Surgery Hamamatsu University School of Medicine Hamamatsu Japan.
Hiroya TakeuchiDepartment of Surgery Hamamatsu University School of Medicine Hamamatsu Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3947-0128
Yoshifumi MoritaDepartment of Surgery Hamamatsu University School of Medicine Hamamatsu Japan.
Yoshihiro HiramatsuDepartment of Surgery Hamamatsu University School of Medicine Hamamatsu Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1448-1610
Hirotoshi KikuchiDepartment of Surgery Hamamatsu University School of Medicine Hamamatsu Japan.
Hamamatsu University School of Medicine · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thoracic esophagectomy is a particularly invasive and complicated surgical procedure, with a reconstruction of the gastrointestinal tract, such as the stomach, jejunum, or colon. The posterior mediastinal, retrosternal, and subcutaneous routes are the three possible esophageal reconstruction routes. Each route has advantages and disadvantages, and the optimal reconstruction route after esophagectomy remains controversial. Additionally, the best anastomotic techniques after esophagectomy in terms of location (Ivor Lewis or McKeown) and suturing (manual or mechanical) are debatable. Our meta-analysis investigating postoperative complications after esophagectomy between the posterior mediastinal and retrosternal routes revealed that the posterior mediastinal route was associated with a significantly lower anastomotic leakage rate than the retrosternal route (odds ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.70-0.87,

Indexed as

esophageal reconstructionesophagectomyIvor LewisMcKeownposterior mediastinal routeretrosternal routesubcutaneous route

Identifiers

PMID37416735
PMCPMC10319624
OpenAlexW4368376285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.