ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2025
Longitudinal Follow-up of Medicare Patients After Esophageal Cancer Resection in the STS Database.
Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2025. 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.
- Five Major Advancements in Thoracic Surgery Over the Past 50 Years.World journal of surgery · 2026Review
- Redefining outcomes in esophageal cancer surgery: insights from longitudinal Medicare data.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Real-world patient outcome after esophageal cancer resection-implications and future directions.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Comparison of segmentectomy and wedge resection for cT1cN0M0 non-small cell lung cancer.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding characteristics associated with survival after esophagectomy for cancer is critical to preoperative risk stratification. This study sought to define predictors for long-term survival after esophagectomy for cancer in Medicare patients.
methodsThe Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database was queried for patients aged ≥65 years who underwent esophagectomy for cancer between 2012 and 2020 and linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data using a deterministic matching algorithm. Patient, hospital, and treatment variables were assessed using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate characteristics associated with long-term mortality and readmission. Kaplan-Meier and cumulative incidence curves were generated and differences evaluated using the log-rank test and Gray's test, respectively.
resultsAfter CMS linkage, 4798 patients were included. Thirty-day and 90-day mortality in the study group was 3.84% and 7.45%, respectively. In the multivariable model, American Society of Anesthesiologists score >3, body mass index >35, and diabetes were associated with increased mortality <90 days post-surgery, while pN/pT upstaging was associated with increased mortality >90 days post-surgery. Patients upstaged to pN(+) had a 147% increased mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.47; 95% CI, 2.02-3.02) and those that remained pN(+) a 75% increased mortality risk (aHR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.57-1.95) compared with downstaged patients. Patients who were pT upstaged had a 109% (aHR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.73-2.53) increased mortality risk compared with pT downstaged patients. Risk for readmission was independent of procedure type or approach and was higher in c stage ≥2, American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥4, and pN+.
conclusionsMedicare patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer have identifiable patient-specific predictors for short-term mortality and tumor-specific predictors for long-term mortality and readmission. In the absence of pathologic T and N downstaging, risk for long-term mortality and readmission are increased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39147116What 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.