ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2026
Simulation study on the regionalization of esophagectomy using data from 27,476 patients in Japan.
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. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough a strong volume-outcome association for esophagectomy has been reported in Japan, no national policy for regionalization currently exists. This study simulated the impact of regionalization on operative mortality, patient travel distance, and geographic disparities using a nationwide clinical database.
methodsPatients who underwent esophagectomy with reconstruction for malignant tumors were identified from the Japanese National Clinical Database. Four simulation scenarios were established by setting minimum volume standards (MVSs) at 2, 5, 10, and 15 cases annually. Operative mortality in each simulation scenario was estimated using a model that incorporated both the post-regionalization hospital case volume and the characteristics of reassigned patients. Changes in travel distance were also evaluated across the metropolitan, provincial, and rural regions.
resultsAmong 27,476 patients treated across 1,041 hospitals, 76% of hospitals performed < 5 cases annually. The operative mortality decreased with increasing hospital volume (< 2 cases/year: 4.8%, ≥ 15 cases/year: 1.6%). Based on the simulations, applying MVSs of 2, 5, 10, and 15 reduced the mortality rates to 2.7%, 2.1%, 1.8%, and 1.7%, respectively-corresponding to 8-29 fewer deaths annually. However, 7%-38% of patients would need to travel to the nearest eligible hospital. In metropolitan areas, an MVS of 15 would increase the median travel distance by 2.6 km only. In rural areas, the distance would increase by 24 km at an MVS of 2 and by 43 km at an MVS of 15.
conclusionsRegionalization of esophagectomy in Japan could significantly reduce operative mortality. However, it would increase travel burdens among patients in rural areas. Therefore, balancing outcome improvement and accessibility will be essential for policy implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42295652What 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.