ArticleIndian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2026
Textbook outcomes in oesophageal resections from an evolving thoracic surgical unit.
Article in Indian journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite metric of surgical quality. This study evaluated TO in oesophageal resections at a low-volume thoracic surgical unit in a Tier-2 city in India, assessing its applicability in a resource-constrained setting. This retrospective study included all patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing curative resection at our centre from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2024. Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained surgical database and electronic medical records. Clinico-radiological, histopathological, and surgical outcomes were evaluated. TO was defined using the 2017 Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Cancer Audit, comprising ten parameters, including complete resection, no major morbidity, and adequate lymph node yield. Among 41 patients, TO was achieved in 14 (34.1%). Major perioperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥ II) occurred in 7 (17.1%) patients, with two (4.8%) perioperative deaths. Complete resection as per surgeon assessment was achieved in all cases (41/41, 100%), while optimal lymph node yield (≥ 15 nodes) was the most challenging parameter (25/41, 61%), followed by no 30-day readmission (34/41, 82.9%). TO was achieved in one-third of patients, comparable to international benchmarks, but optimal lymph node yield remains a challenge. TO is a useful quality assurance tool, though context-specific adaptations may enhance its relevance in India.
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.