ArticleFuture science OA2025
Safety and feasibility of early oral feeding following hand-sewn cervical esophagogastric anastomosis in ESCC.
Article in Future science OA, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the safety and feasibility of early oral feeding (EOF) after cervical hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomosis in minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 80 ESCC patients undergoing thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy (2020-2024). Based on anastomotic technique and feeding timing, patients were divided into hand-sewn (EOF on postoperative day 1) and mechanical anastomosis groups (oral feeding on days 7-9). Outcomes included operative parameters, complications, and recovery indicators.
resultsThe hand-sewn group demonstrated longer duration of operation (450 vs. 390 min) but superior outcomes: less blood loss (80 vs. 100 mL), shorter hospitalization (11 vs. 16.5 days), lower pain scores (3 vs. 7), and faster gastrointestinal recovery (3 vs. 5 days) (all
conclusionEarly oral feeding following hand-sewn cervical anastomosis is safe and feasible in selected ESCC patients, promoting faster recovery with fewer complications, and should be incorporated into enhanced recovery protocols.
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.