ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Retrospective comparative study of video- and robot-assisted esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Perioperative outcomes of robotic versus conventional minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to explore the advantages of robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE) over video-assisted esophagectomy (VAE) for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data for patients with locally advanced ESCC (cT2-4aN0-3M0) who underwent NCRT from January 2015 to December 2021. Kaplan-Meier survival curves for univariate survival analysis and Cox regression analysis for multivariate survival analysis were used to compare overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
resultsNinety-five patients (59.3 ± 7.1 years) were included in the study, including 65 with VAE and 30 with RAE. There were no significant differences in surgical time, bleeding volume, or the number of lymph node dissections between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and intensive care unit readmission rate were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). Eighty-eight patients were followed up with a median follow-up time of 30 (4-93) months. The 1-year and 3-year OS in the RAE group were 93.1% and 73.5%, respectively, while the 1-year and 3-year OS in the VAE group were 81.4% and 52.5%, respectively (P = 0.046). Cox multivariate analysis showed that ypTNM staging was an independent prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.031) and DFS (P = 0.049).
conclusionsThe short-term clinical outcomes of RAE for locally advanced ESCC after NCRT are satisfactory, and the long-term survival is not inferior to that of VAE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40767915What 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.