ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
The clinical relevance of postoperative routine contrast swallow following esophagectomy.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Limited evidence exists regarding the role of the routine contrast swallow in determining the safety of initiating oral intake following esophagectomy. Therefore, this study evaluated its clinical relevance in decision-making regarding oral intake. Methods: A descriptive, observational, single-center study included esophageal cancer patients who underwent esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction between March 2019 and March 2021. Patients were kept nil by mouth until postoperative day (POD) 3 and began oral intake from POD 4 if the contrast swallow was normal. The primary outcome was routine use (POD 2-6) of the contrast swallow and its impact on oral intake decisions. Predictors of an abnormal contrast swallow were explored using logistic regression. Results: A contrast swallow was routinely performed in 80 of 110 patients (73%), of which 48 (44%) had a normal contrast swallow, while 32 (29%) had an abnormal contrast swallow. Ultimately, in 28 patients (25%), findings of the contrast swallow led to a decision to delay oral intake. All abnormal contrast swallows (n=32) involved aspiration (n=30, 94%) or laryngeal penetration (n=2, 6%). Aspiration occurred alongside delayed gastric conduit emptying in 2 cases, and anastomotic leakage was suspected in 2 others but not confirmed on computed tomography (CT) scan. No statistically independent predictors of an abnormal contrast swallow were identified in multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Routine contrast swallow following esophagectomy led to withholding oral intake in 25% of cases. Future research should explore a more selective approach in specific patient categories.
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.