ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2026
Initial experiences of the transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer via intercostal approach with the single-port robotic surgical system.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Uniportal versus Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe robotic single-port surgical system (SPS) presents several potential advantages over conventional multiport (MP) robotic systems; however, its feasibility in esophageal cancer surgery remains unclear. This study compared the outcomes of transthoracic robotic SPS esophagectomy via an intercostal approach with conventional robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE).
methodsBetween December 2024 and November 2025, 104 cases of MP RAMIE and 21 cases of transthoracic robotic esophagectomy via an intercostal approach using the SPS for esophageal cancer were compared.
resultsBaseline demographics were comparable between groups. Although clinical stage distribution did not differ significantly, patients in the SPS group more frequently had earlier-stage disease. Neoadjuvant therapy was more commonly administered in the MP group. Operative outcomes were comparable between the two approaches. Total operation time and robotic console time did not differ significantly. Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the SPS group. The number of dissected lymph nodes (LNs), including bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve LN, and R0 resection rates were similar. Postoperative hospital stay and peak pain scores during admission were also comparable. Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) occurred in 34.4% of patients, with no significant difference between groups. Postoperative vocal cord palsy occurred less frequently in the SPS group. One postoperative death occurred in the SPS group due to acute myocardial infarction, which was considered unrelated to the surgical procedure.
conclusionsTransthoracic robotic SPS esophagectomy via the intercostal approach was feasible and safe, and enabled sufficient upper mediastinal lymph node dissection compared to MP RAMIE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42047964What 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.