ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Single-sterilization modified-position robotic-assisted McKeown esophagectomy versus minimally invasive approach after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgical resection remains a key component of multimodal therapy for patients with resectable or locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy (nCIT). This study compared the safety and efficacy of single-sterilization modified-position robotic-assisted esophagectomy (SM-RAE) with conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), focusing on perioperative outcomes, composite adverse events, electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs), and short-term oncologic results. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included 137 ESCC patients who underwent McKeown esophagectomy after nCIT between January 2022 and December 2024. Of them, 36 received SM-RAE and 101 received MIE. Baseline characteristics, perioperative indicators, composite adverse events (operative time ≥330 min, intraoperative blood loss ≥400 mL, conversion to open, non-R0 resection, or Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications), ePROs (pain, cough, distress, dysphagia, and dyspnea), and short-term survival outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance baseline variables, and comparisons were repeated after matching. Results: Compared with MIE, SM-RAE resulted in shorter operative time (270 Conclusions: SM-RAE is a safe, effective, and feasible surgical option for ESCC patients after nCIT. For selected patients with locally advanced disease, SM-RAE offers a non-inferior alternative to standard MIE, with advantages in perioperative efficiency, RLN lymphadenectomy, and patient-reported recovery.
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.