Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40536623›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of clinical oncology2025

Current advances and challenges in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Eisuke Booka, Hiroya Takeuchi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eisuke BookaDepartment of Surgery, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, 1-20-1 Handayama, Chuo-Ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, 431-3192, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-3856-1715
Hiroya TakeuchiDepartment of Surgery, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, 1-20-1 Handayama, Chuo-Ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, 431-3192, Japan. takeuchi@hama-med.ac.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in endoscopic equipment and thoracoscopic surgery have contributed to the increasing adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Compared with open esophagectomy (OE), MIE is associated with longer operative times and offers many advantages, such as reduced blood loss and a lower incidence of pulmonary complications, including pneumonia. Two patient positions are commonly used for thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE): left lateral decubitus position and prone position. MIE has demonstrated significant benefits in reducing postoperative respiratory complications. However, the optimal MIE technique, surgical approach, and patient positioning remain controversial. Recently, robot-assisted thoracoscopic and/or laparoscopic esophagectomy using the da Vinci Surgical System and other emerging robotic platforms has gained attention as an attractive surgical option. In addition, nonthoracic radical esophagectomy, performed via transcervical or transhiatal approaches using mediastinoscopic devices, has been developed as an alternative approach. Despite these technological advances, there is a lack of definitive scientific evidence establishing MIE as a superior alternative to OE. However, a recent randomized phase III trial (JCOG1409) confirmed the noninferiority of TE compared with OE in terms of overall survival of patients with thoracic esophageal cancer. Furthermore, MIE-including robotic-assisted and mediastinoscopic approaches-has been associated with lower pulmonary complication rates while maintaining comparable oncological outcomes. These findings support the adoption of MIE as a standard treatment modality in Japan. Future studies should focus on evaluating the long-term outcomes of MIE and determining the optimal integration of robotic assistance in the surgical management of esophageal cancer.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresHumansLaparoscopyPostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical ProceduresThoracoscopyEsophageal cancerEsophagectomyLaparoscopyMediastinoscopyRoboticThoracoscopy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.