International survey on esophageal cancer: Part I surgical techniques
Diseases of the Esophagus, ISSN: 1120-8694, Vol: 22, Issue: 3, Page: 195-202
2009
- 78Citations
- 39Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations78
- Citation Indexes77
- 77
- CrossRef65
- Clinical Citations1
- PubMed Guidelines1
- Captures39
- Readers39
- 39
Article Description
In patients with esophageal cancer, radical surgical resection of the esophagus and surrounding lymph nodes is the only curative treatment option. Nevertheless, no standard surgical procedure exists. The aims of the present study were to gain insight into the frequencies of the various surgical techniques in esophageal cancer surgery as applied by surgeons throughout the world and to identify intercontinental differences regarding surgical techniques. Surgeons with particular interest in esophageal surgery, including members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the European Society of Esophagology Group d'Etude Européen des Maladies de l'Oesophage and the OESO, were invited to participate in an online questionnaire. Questions were asked regarding approach to esophagectomy, extent of lymphadenectomy (LND), type of reconstruction, and anastomotic techniques. Subanalyses were performed for the surgeons' case volume per year, years of experience in esophageal cancer surgery, and continent. Of 567 invited surgeons, 269 participated, resulting in an overall response rate of 47%. The responders currently performing esophagectomies (n = 250; 44%), represented 41 countries across the six continents. Fifty-two percent of responders favor open transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) over transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) or minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). THE is preferred by 26%, whereas MIE is favored by 14%. Eight percent have no preference for one approach to esophagectomy over the other. The extent of LND is most frequently the 2-field, routinely performed by 73% of surgeons. The continuity of the digestive tract is most frequently restored with a gastric conduit (85%). In open TTE, the anastomosis is routinely created in the neck by 56% of responders and in the chest by 40%. Cervical anastomoses are routinely fashioned by means of a handsewn technique by 65% of responders, while 35% favor the stapled technique. The cervical incision is predominantly performed vertically on the left side of the neck (routinely by 66%). A horizontal neck incision is routinely carried out by 19% of responders and a vertical right-sided incision by 11%. Significant differences in surgical techniques could be detected between low- and high-volume surgeons, between surgeons with ≤10 versus ≥21 years of experience, and between surgeons from different continents. In conclusion, currently the most commonly applied surgical procedure is the open right-sided transthoracic approach with a two-field lymphadenectomy, using a gastric tube anastomosed at the left side of the neck by means of a handsewn, end-to-side technique. The results of this survey provide baseline data for future research and for the development of international guidelines. © 2009 International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=65349190142&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2050.2008.00929.x; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19191856; https://academic.oup.com/dote/article-lookup/doi/10.1111/j.1442-2050.2008.00929.x; https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2050.2008.00929.x; https://academic.oup.com/dote/article-abstract/22/3/195/2329112?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know