ArticleIndian journal of surgical oncology2025
Comparison of Outcomes After McKeown and Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Lower Third Esophageal Cancer.
Article in Indian journal of surgical oncology, 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.
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
The commonly performed surgical procedures for esophageal cancer are McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. The Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is mainly performed for lower esophageal cancer. Herein, we analyzed both procedures performed for lower esophageal cancer to look for perioperative and survival outcomes. The surgical data was retrieved from the computerized database, and the patients operated on for lower esophageal cancer from 2014 to 2019 were included. Both procedures were analyzed for demographic details, perioperative outcomes, complication rate, and overall and disease-free survivals. A total of 90 patients undergoing esophagectomy for lower esophageal cancer. RLN palsy and anastomotic leak rate were higher in the McKeown group. The estimated 5-year OS was 49% and 58.3% in the McKeown and Ivor Lewis groups, respectively, whereas the estimated 5-year DFS was 41% and 63.9%. In the Ivor Lewis group, on comparing both histological subtypes, the estimated 5-year OS was 74% and 26.3% (
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.