SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Prediction of Morbidity and Mortality After Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Survival outcomes following total intravenous versus volatile anesthesia in esophagogastric cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- The Impact of Early Oral Feeding on Post-Operative Morbidity After Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Association of preoperative psoas muscle index with clinical outcomes in surgical esophageal cancer patients: a meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Pooled it
- Long-term outcomes of additional surgical versus nonsurgical treatment after non-curative endoscopic resection for T1 superficial esophageal cancer.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Risk prediction model for postoperative pneumonia in esophageal cancer patients: A systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Clinician and patient attitudes toward locoregional treatment of oligometastatic oesophago-gastric cancers: a mixed-methods study.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a clinically interpretable risk scoring system for predicting one-year all-cause mortality in esophageal cancer: a population-based study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Postoperative pulmonary complications after esophagectomy: risk factors and prediction model.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026Article
- Integration of MSK-FI and clinical variables to predict postoperative complications after esophagectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Preoperative Aggregate Index of Systemic Inflammation is Associated with 30-Day Postoperative Pneumonia After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Preoperative Fibrinogen-to-Prealbumin Ratio and in-Hospital Postoperative Pneumonia After Minimally Invasive McKeown Esophagectomy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study with Infection Phenotype Profiling.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophagectomy for esophageal cancer has a complication rate of up to 60%. Prediction models could be helpful to preoperatively estimate which patients are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the best prediction models for morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy and to identify commonalities among the models. PATIENTS AND
methodsA systematic review was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , study ID CRD42022350846). Pubmed, Embase, and Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection were searched for studies published between 2010 and August 2022. The Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Extracted data were tabulated and a narrative synthesis was performed.
resultsOf the 15,011 articles identified, 22 studies were included using data from tens of thousands of patients. This systematic review included 33 different models, of which 18 models were newly developed. Many studies showed a high risk of bias. The prognostic accuracy of models differed between 0.51 and 0.85. For most models, variables are readily available. Two models for mortality and one model for pulmonary complications have the potential to be developed further.
conclusionsThe availability of rigorous prediction models is limited. Several models are promising but need to be further developed. Some models provide information about risk factors for the development of complications. Performance status is a potential modifiable risk factor. None are ready for clinical implementation.
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.