ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023
Comparison of Clinical Efficacy Between Da Vinci Robot-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy and McKeown Esophagectomy for Middle and Lower Thoracic Esophageal Cancer: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Study.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effectiveness of intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence imaging in preventing anastomotic leakage after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Ivor Lewis minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus McKeown approach: short-term benefits and mid-term equivalence in a randomized trial for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Trial
- Comparative evaluation of transmediastinal and minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: perioperative and oncologic outcomes.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of the da Vinci robot versus thoracoscopic surgery for patients with mediastinal tumors of different body mass index: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe compared the perioperative efficacy and safety of da Vinci robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and McKeown esophagectomy for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer.
methodsA retrospective case-control study method was used. A total of 181 patients with esophageal cancer admitted to three medical centers in China from February 2018 to October 2022 were collected and divided into two groups according to surgical method: da Vinci robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (Ivor Lewis group) and RATS McKeown esophagectomy (McKeown group), respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to reduce selection bias caused by confounding factors. The perioperative indicators of the two groups were compared and analyzed.
resultsThere was a statistically significant difference in age and tumor location between the Ivor Lewis group and the McKeown group. After PSM, the above factors were no longer statistically significant. There were 80 patients in each group after PSM. In terms of operative time (P = 0.005), anastomotic leakage (P = 0.029), and pulmonary infection (P = 0.035), the Ivor Lewis group has significant advantages; in terms of the number of lymph nodes dissected around the recurrent laryngeal nerve (P = 0.010), the McKeown group has significant advantages.
conclusionBoth RATS Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and McKeown esophagectomy are safe and effective for treatment of middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer. Ivor Lewis has advantages in operative time, anastomotic leakage, and pulmonary infection, while McKeown has advantage in lymph node dissection around the recurrent laryngeal nerve.
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.