ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2026
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.
Review in Annals of gastroenterological 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Esophageal cancer is a highly aggressive malignancy with regional variations in histological subtypes. Adenocarcinoma predominates in Western countries, whereas squamous cell carcinoma is more common in Asia. Despite advances in multimodal therapy, esophagectomy remains the cornerstone of curative treatment, and the development of various minimally invasive esophagectomies (MIE) has been promoted to reduce invasiveness and complications. The status of the MIE has been outlined. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE to identify relevant studies on MIE published up to June 2025. The search focused on thoracoscopic, robot-assisted, and mediastinoscopic approaches, with an emphasis on randomized trials and high-quality comparative studies. Results: Thoracoscopic MIE, especially in the prone position, demonstrated reduced pulmonary complications and shorter recovery times than open surgery, as supported by randomized trials such as TIME, MIRO, and MONET. Robot-assisted MIE (RAMIE) further enhances lymph node dissection and improves preservation of the recurrent laryngeal nerve, as demonstrated in trials such as REVATE and RAMIE. Mediastinoscopic esophagectomy via the transcervical and transhiatal approaches is emerging as a promising alternative for high-risk patients, offering favorable perioperative outcomes with reduced pulmonary complications. Further evaluation is required to determine the efficacy of lymph node dissection and the risk of recurrent laryngeal nerve damage. Conclusion: MIE, including the thoracoscopic, robot-assisted, and mediastinoscopic approaches, is evolving into an effective and less invasive alternative to open surgery. Future research should focus on conducting standardized, multicenter trials to establish optimal surgical strategies based on tumor characteristics and patient-specific factors.
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.