ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2023
Milestones in the History of Esophagectomy: From Torek to Minimally Invasive Approaches.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Advances in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy-An Overview of Recent Developments and a Novel Classification of Innovations in Treatment of Thoracic Esophageal Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) vs. Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) for Esophageal Cancer: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis from 2017 to 2020.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2025Article
- Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The history of esophagectomy reflects a journey of dedication, collaboration, and technical innovation, with ongoing endeavors aimed at optimizing outcomes and reducing complications. From its early attempts to modern minimally invasive approaches, the journey has been marked by perseverance and innovation. Franz J. A. Torek's 1913 successful esophageal resection marked a milestone, demonstrating the feasibility of transthoracic esophagectomy and the potential for esophageal cancer cure. However, its high mortality rate posed challenges, and it took almost two decades for similar successes to emerge. Surgical techniques evolved with the left thoracotomy, right thoracotomy, and transhiatal approaches, expanding the indications for resection. Mechanical staplers introduced in the early 20th century transformed anastomosis, reducing complications. The advent of minimally invasive techniques in the 1990s aimed to minimize complications while maintaining oncological efficacy. Robot-assisted esophagectomy further pushed the boundaries of minimally invasive surgery. Collaborative efforts, particularly from the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration and the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group, standardized reporting and advanced the understanding of outcomes. The introduction of risk prediction models aids in making informed decisions. Despite significant improvements in survival rates and postoperative mortality, anastomotic leaks remain a concern, with recent rates showing an increase. Prevention strategies include microvascular anastomosis and ischemic preconditioning, yet challenges persist.
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.