ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Minimally invasive resection of esophageal leiomyoma: 24 year experience.
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.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEsophageal leiomyoma is the most common benign submucosal esophageal tumor, with enucleation as the preferred treatment. This study evaluates our institution's experience with minimally invasive surgical management of esophageal leiomyoma.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent surgery for histologically confirmed esophageal leiomyoma between 2000 and 2024. Patients with other submucosal tumors (i.e. GISTs), esophageal carcinoma, or those who underwent endoscopic resection were excluded.
results53 patients underwent surgical resection for esophageal leiomyoma during the 24-year study period. Surgical approaches included thoracoscopic enucleation in 33 patients (62.3%), laparoscopic enucleation in 13 patients (24.5%), thoracoscopic conversion to open enucleation in 5 patients (9.4%), and minimally invasive esophagectomy in 2 patients (3.8%). The mean tumor size was 4.92 cm. Perioperative complication rates were infrequent: intraoperative mucosal injury occurred in 3 patients (5.7%), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≤ II postoperative complications were reported in 3 patients (5.7%). Notably, there were no instances of major morbidity or postoperative leaks. The mean hospital length of stay was 4 days. Among patients who underwent thoracoscopic enucleation (mean tumor size: 4.6 cm), dysphagia was the most common presenting symptom (68.8%). In the laparoscopic group (mean tumor size: 3.3 cm), reflux was predominant (76.9%), and 7 patients (53.8%) underwent concomitant fundoplication (4 Nissen, 2 Dor, 1 Toupet). Persistent reflux occurred in 4 patients who did not have concurrent anti-reflux procedures (30.8% of laparoscopic cases), with two patients (15.4%) requiring subsequent fundoplications.
conclusionsMinimally invasive enucleation may offer a safe and effective treatment for esophageal leiomyoma. Thoracoscopic enucleation may be suitable for proximal to mid-esophageal tumors, while laparoscopic enucleation with anti-reflux surgery may be advisable for distal tumors within 3 cm proximal to the gastrointestinal junction to reduce postoperative reflux and the need for future surgical interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41071212What 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.