ArticleJTCVS open2025
Evaluating failure to rescue after esophagectomy: The esophagectomy failure to rescue assessment, trends, and Evaluation (E-FATE) study.
Article in JTCVS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of best practice meetings on clinical outcomes in surgical and oncological care: a scoping review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Failure to rescue after esophagectomy: Perspective on the esophagectomy failure to rescue assessment, trends, and evaluation study.JTCVS open · 2026Article
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: Failure to rescue, defined as death after a postoperative complication, is a key metric for evaluating hospital performance and surgical quality. We hypothesized that both patient characteristics and hospital performance are associated with failure to rescue risk after esophagectomy. Methods: We analyzed esophagectomy cases from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database (2012-2023), excluding emergency surgeries and colonic interpositions. The primary outcome was failure to rescue, defined as death within 30 days or during the index hospitalization after a complication. Hospitals were grouped into quintiles based on their risk-adjusted standardized mortality ratio using hierarchical logistic regression. We compared failure to rescue rates between hospitals in the top (very low standardized mortality ratio) and bottom (very high standardized mortality ratio) quintiles using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering. Failure to rescue rates were further stratified across patient risk categories using established Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk metrics. Results: A total of 28,626 patients from 318 hospitals were included. Top-tier hospitals performed more procedures than bottom-tier hospitals (10,431 vs 3527, Conclusions: Hospital performance is strongly associated with failure to rescue after esophagectomy, even after adjusting for patient risk. System-level interventions are needed to reduce variation in rescue capacity.
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.