ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2025
Prediction of esophagogastric anastomotic leakage by nomogram combined with preoperative nutritional status and clinical factors: a retrospective study of 775 patients.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis of risk factors for anastomotic leakage after radical esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe purpose was to explore the independent risk factors for esophagogastric anastomotic leakage (EGAL) and establish a nomogram.
methodsPatients who underwent esophagectomy were enrolled and randomly divided into a training cohort and a validation cohort at a ratio of 7:3. The differences between the two groups of factors were analyzed by difference analysis, and multivariate regression analysis was subsequently performed. A nomogram was established, and the feasibility of the nomogram was verified by analyzing the discrimination, calibration, and decision curves.
resultsA total of 775 patients were enrolled, including 532 in the training cohort and 223 in the validation cohort. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that age, smoking history, drinking history, nutritional indicators, and anastomotic location were independent risk factors. In terms of discrimination, in the training group, the area under the curve was 0.757 (P = 0.025). In the calibration curve, the curves and fitting lines before and after correction in the training group and the validation group were basically the same. The results of the Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed that the chi-square value of the training cohort was 5.48 (P = 0.791). In the decision curve analysis of the training set, when the threshold probability was in the range of 5-63%, the net benefit of patients was greater than that of the two extreme curves.
conclusionPreoperative malnutrition is an independent risk factor for EGAL. A diagnostic model, developed on age, anastomotic location, smoking status, and drinking history, was a reliable noninvasive tool to timely predict the occurrence of AL.
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.