ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Extent and Boundaries of Lymph Node Stations During Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Survey Among Dutch Esophageal Surgeons.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automatic recognition of anatomical structures and surgical phases in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) using deep learning: a retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- 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
- [Evidence for the extent and oncological benefit of lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Review
- The Impact of Paratracheal Lymphadenectomy on Survival After Esophagectomy: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Analysis.Cancers · 2025Article
- Quantity Over Quality? Dutch Surgeons' Perceptions About Lymph Node Dissection During Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal extent of lymph node dissection (LND) and the anatomic boundaries per lymph node station (LNS) during minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer remain a topic of debate. This study investigated the opinion of Dutch esophageal cancer surgeons on their routine LND extent and anatomic boundaries per LNS during MIE.
methodsIn April 2023, an English web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted. In each of the 15 Dutch hospitals performing MIE, two MIE surgeons were asked to participate. The routine LND extent (quantity, specific LNS) for distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, (dis)agreement with the TIGER definition, and anatomic boundaries for each LNS in six directions were queried.
resultsThe survey was completed by 24 Dutch MIE surgeons (80% response rate). Consensus on the routine LND extent ( ≥ 85% of the participating surgeons) included the left and right paracardial, left gastric artery, celiac trunk, proximal splenic artery, common hepatic artery, subcarinal middle mediastinal paraoesophageal, lower mediastinal paraoesophageal, pulmonary ligament, and upper mediastinal paraoesophageal LNSs. Other LNSs were not widely considered routine. Although, certain anatomic boundaries were consistent among the surgeons, the majority varied, even when they agreed on the TIGER definition.
conclusionSignificant variations in surgical practice among Dutch esophageal surgeons regarding their routine extent of LND and anatomic boundaries of LNSs during MIE were demonstrated. Variation may have an impact on clinical outcomes, hampering uniform treatment strategies and hindering comparison of performance assessments. This study highlighted the need for an international follow-up study toward one uniform defined LND during MIE for esophageal cancer.
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.