ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Long-gap esophageal atresia: a single center experience.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To summarize the treatment experience and individualized treatment strategies for children with long-gap esophageal atresia (LGEA) at a single center. Methods: The clinical data of children with LGEA admitted to Shanxi Provincial Children's Hospital from January 2018 to December 2024 were collected and analyzed. The data included classification, gap length, timing of surgery, methods of esophageal elongation, methods of esophageal anastomosis, postoperative complications, prognosis, etc. Results: A total of 7 children with LGEA were studied, with 3 males and 4 females. Among them, 6 cases were Type I esophageal atresia (EA), 1 case was Type II EA. The average distance between the blind ends of the esophagus was approximately (5.36 ± 0.75) cm. All 7 cases were followed up completely, with 5 cases achieving full recovery, 1 cases having poor prognosis, and 1 cases resulting in death. The overall mortality rate was 14.28% (1/7). Type I EA had 6 cases, with the esophageal blind ends approximately (5.25 ± 0.76) cm apart during the neonatal period. All underwent staged surgery: stage I involved gastrostomy during the neonatal period, and stage II involved esophageal anastomosis, gastric replacement esophagectomy, or colonic replacement esophagectomy. The average age at stage II surgery was (210.83 ± 115.75) days. Type II EA had 1 case, with the esophageal blind ends approximately 6 cm apart during the neonatal period. Staged surgery was performed: Stage I, gastrostomy during the neonatal period; Stage II, esophageal-tracheal fistula ligation and intra-thoracic esophageal traction at both ends; Stage III, esophageal anastomosis. Conclusion: The treatment of LGEA is still challenging, good treatment results can be obtained by formulating a personalized treatment plan, selecting an appropriate surgical method, delaying anastomosis, preserving the original esophagus as much as possible, strengthening perioperative management, and establishing long-term follow-up.
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.