GuidelineDiseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus2026
International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy.
Guideline in Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnastomotic leak (AL) is a severe complication after esophagectomy. Guidelines for the management of AL are lacking. This study aimed to develop a consensus statement for managing AL after esophagectomy. A three-stage modified Delphi study was performed in collaboration with the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus Guidelines Committee. In Stage 1, a scoping systematic review was performed to identify available literature used to formulate Delphi statements. Stage 2 involved a two-round Delphi survey, distributed globally to surgeons and gastroenterologists. Consensus was defined as ≥80% (strong) (dis)agreement on a Delphi statement. During Stage 3 (guideline development), an international expert panel formulated clinical recommendations based on Delphi consensus and assigned strength in line with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation principles. A clinical care algorithm was developed based on these recommendations. Of 5.843 articles screened, 118 were included to form Delphi statements. The Delphi survey was completed by 106 respondents in the first round and 136 in the second. Based on Delphi consensus and expert panel discussions, 12 diagnostic recommendations were formulated, covering clinical signs, biochemical tests, and imaging strategies. 11 recommendations were formulated regarding treatment strategies, including indications and techniques for supportive care, drainage and defect closure. This led to the development of a clinical care algorithm. A consensus statement for the diagnosis and treatment of AL after esophagectomy was developed. This may aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of AL and provide a tool for standardizing clinical practice with the aim to improve patient outcomes.
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.