ArticleRevista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social2026
[Esophageal perforation: surgical outcomes in a referral center].
Article in Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 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: Esophageal perforation is a rare and potentially life-threatening condition. Its main etiologies include iatrogenic, traumatic, and neoplastic causes. Diagnosis is based on imaging and endoscopic studies. Although some cases can be managed conservatively, most require endoscopic or surgical interventions. Clinical case: A case study was conducted analyzing the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of patients with esophageal perforation treated at a referral hospital between 2019 and 2023. Twenty patients were included, with a mean age of 52 years and a predominance of men. The most frequent perforation sites were the cervical and abdominal regions, followed by the thoracic region. The etiology was iatrogenic in 13 cases and traumatic in 7 patients. The most common symptoms were pain, edema, and purulent drainage, and the predominant radiographic finding was contrast medium leakage. The mean time to diagnosis was 5.5 days. All patients required surgical management: primary closure in 4 cases, primary closure with jejunostomy in 5, primary closure with muscle patch in 3, and esophagectomy with esophagostomy and jejunostomy in 8 patients. The overall mortality rate was 20%. Conclusions: In this series, a high proportion of late diagnoses were observed, related to the time of referral to the unit; however, all patients required surgical treatment. Despite this, the observed mortality rate was comparable to that reported in the international literature.
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.