ArticleBMC surgery2025
Postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: an international cohort study from the Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA).
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) after minimally invasive or open transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in an international, multicenter cohort. Ongoing debate exists around the optimal surgical approach for esophageal cancer, with limited data assessing the external validity of randomised trials on outcomes of MIE
methodsPatients undergoing open (OE, n = 744), hybrid (HE, n = 500), and totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE, n = 540) for esophageal cancer were identified from the international, prospective Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA). Multivariable models were used to investigate PPC (primary outcome) as well as overall complications, major complications, anastomotic leak and 90-day mortality (secondary outcomes).
resultsPPC rates were lower after TMIE compared to OE and HE (28% vs 37% vs 39%, p = 0.002), even on adjusted analyses compared to OE (odds ratio (OR): 0.60, CI
conclusionThis study provides real-world data that TMIE was associated with lower 90-day PPC than OE and HE approaches, especially in patients with underlying respiratory disease or receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. These warrant a further review into causes and mechanisms in selected patients, and that quality assurance in delivery of TMIE is probably of major importance. The ideal surgical approach remains unclear, and ongoing trials will provide more evidence within a few years that may clarify the optimum approach to locally advanced esophageal cancers.
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.