ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Analysis of risk factors for anastomotic leakage after radical esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most common complications of radical surgery for esophageal cancer. This study aimed to analyze the risk factors for AL after radical esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and construct a nomogram prediction model. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of all patients who underwent radical esophagectomy between 2018 and 2023. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify the risk factors for AL. After screening the relevant variables, a prediction model for AL risk was established, and the predictive accuracy and clinical utility of the model were verified. Results: A total of 107 patients with ESCC were included and the incidence of AL was 21.5% (23/107). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, age (OR 1.131, 95% CI 1.014-1.261, Conclusion: Age, anastomotic location, postoperative RBC count, and postoperative NLR were independent risk factors for AL after radical esophagectomy for ESCC. In addition, this study innovatively provides the mechanistic hypothesis linking cervical AL to the combined effects of anastomotic tension and impaired perfusion, offering a pathophysiological basis for its higher incidence than thoracic anastomosis.
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.