Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37559658›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2023

Chest

Daniel Scheese, Yahya Alwatari, Salem Rustom, Gene He, Carlos A Puig, Walker A Julliard, Rachit D Shah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

7 authors.

Daniel ScheeseVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.
Yahya AlwatariVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.
Salem RustomVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.
Gene HeVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.
Carlos A PuigVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.
Walker A JulliardVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.
Rachit D ShahVirginia Commonwealth University, Section of Thoracic & Foregut Surgery, Department of Surgery, Richmond, VA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Anastomotic leak is a major contributor to comorbidity and mortality following esophagectomy. We sought to assess rate and predictors of leak after esophagectomy and compare outcomes of chest versus neck anastomotic leaks. Methods: A retrospective review was performed utilizing National-Surgical-Quality-Improvement-Program data from 2016-2019 for patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy. Preoperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes were compared. Patients were classified into two groups: Ivor Lewis esophagectomy [ILE, chest leak (CL)] and transhiatal esophagectomy (THE)/McKeown esophagectomy [ME, neck leak (NL)]. Multivariable regression models were constructed to determine predictors of each type of leak and postoperative complications. Results: A total of 1,665 patients underwent esophagectomy with 14.1% reported post-operative leak, 61% of patients underwent ILE while 39% underwent THE or ME. Of patients who underwent ILE, 13.8% had CL with complications including significantly higher length of stay and mortality compared to patients without leak. Independent predictors of CL included: diabetes, hypertension, advanced disease stage, chronic steroid use, and operative time. Ninety-five patients (14.6%) who underwent either THE or ME had NL with similar complications. Diabetes, pre-operative white blood cell (WBC), and operative time were independent predictors for NL. On multivariable regression, CL was associated with greater odds of requiring intervention compared with NL. Conclusions: Post-esophagectomy CL and NL are associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Diabetes and operative time were independent predictors for both leaks while steroid use, hypertension, and advanced disease stage predicted CL. CL was associated with greater odds of needing an intervention, but contrary to conventional wisdom, was not associated with higher morbidity or mortality.

Indexed as

anastomotic leakesophageal canceresophagectomyEsophagus

Identifiers

PMID37559658
PMCPMC10407498

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.