ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Single-port laparoscopic versus multiple-port laparoscopic combined with thoracoscopic for McKeown esophagectomy: a randomized clinical trial.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroupThe optimal number of abdominal ports for minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy remains debated. This study aimed to determine whether single-port laparoscopy combined with thoracoscopy yields superior perioperative outcomes compared to conventional multiport laparoscopy combined with thoracoscopy.
methodsBetween October 2021 and December 2023, 147 patients were randomly assigned to single-port or multiport laparoscopic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Primary outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, and lymph node yield; secondary outcomes comprised complications and recovery indicators.
resultsTotal operative time was comparable between groups (P < . 05). The single-port group exhibited significantly lower total blood loss (60(15, 110) vs. 200(50, 250) mL, P < . 001) and shorter laparoscopic time (49 (39, 57) vs. 57 (45, 76) min, P = . 03). In patients with BMI > 25 kg/m
conclusionsCompared with the multiport approach, single-port laparoscopy reduces blood loss, shortens operative time, and alleviates postoperative pain without compromising oncological efficacy or safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42693202What 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.