ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2024
No difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study using a nationwide Japanese database.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of CiprofolCurrent medicinal chemistry · 2026Trial
- A Totally Laparoscopic Transhiatal Approach for Esophageal Cancer During Mediastinoscopic Esophagectomy.Cancers · 2026Article
- The Effect of Combined General Anesthesia and Epidural Analgesia on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Long-term outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy vs. open esophagectomy in older patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
- Current status of prehabilitation before esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer among board-certified hospitals by the Japan Esophageal Society.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- Development in Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: The Current Standing Point of Robotic Surgery.Cancers · 2025Review
- A purely laparoscopic approach can reduce the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic or open abdominal surgery with thoracotomy: future directions from the ROMIO trial in esophageal cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Association between the COVID-19 pandemic and short-term outcomes after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in facilities with and without board-certified esophageal surgeons: a nationwide retrospective cohort study.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2025Article
- Outcome research on esophagectomy analyzed using nationwide databases in Japan: evidences generated from real-world data.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere remains a lack of evidence regarding the optimal abdominal approach, including laparoscopy, hand-assisted, and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications, particularly pulmonary complications, between laparoscopy and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy using nationwide Japanese databases.
methodsData from patients in the National Clinical Database (NCD) who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were analyzed. The incidence of pulmonary complications was compared between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy after matching the propensity scores (PS) from preoperative factors to account for confounding bias. Laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) was also compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS).
resultsOf the 24,790 patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2018 and 2021, data from 12,633 underwent thoracoscopic procedure. The proportion of patients who experienced pulmonary complications did not significantly differ between the laparoscopy group and the laparotomy group after matching (664/3195 patients, 20.8% versus 702/3195 patients, 22.0%; P = 0.25). No difference in the incidence of pulmonary complications was observed among patients treated using the laparoscopic approach (508/2439 patients, 20.8% in the LAS group versus 498/2439 patients, 20.4% in the HALS group; P = 0.72).
conclusionsWe observed no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between laparoscopy and laparotomy for thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Short-term outcomes were similar between the laparoscopic-assisted approach and the hand-assisted approach. This study provides valuable insights into the optimal abdominal approach for thoracoscopic esophagectomy using data from a nationwide database that reflect real-world clinical practice.
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.