FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3080965765> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3080965765 endingPage "1140" @default.
• W3080965765 startingPage "1133" @default.
• W3080965765 abstract "BackgroundSurgeons have shifted away from the practice of en bloc esophagectomy, particularly in the era of neoadjuvant therapies. Although some still advocate for this radical approach, contemporary data establishing its superiority are sparse. We hypothesized that a more complete, radical resection could be completed in the setting of chemoradiation without adding morbidity.MethodsPatients undergoing esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal adenocarcinoma from 2006-2018 were evaluated. Outcomes after right transthoracic en bloc esophagectomy were compared with standard esophagectomy to determine the impact on outcomes. A Cox proportional hazard model was evaluated, and logistic regression was performed to determine the impact of en bloc resection on postoperative morbidity.ResultsA total of 604 patients were identified, including 133 (22%) who underwent modified en bloc esophagectomy. Positive margins were most likely to occur in standard esophagectomy (35 of 471, 7%) vs en bloc (3 of 133, 2%) (P = .026). En bloc resection yielded a greater lymph node harvest (27; interquartile range, 22-36), as compared to standard esophagectomy (22; interquartile range, 17-28), P < .001. Multivariable analysis demonstrated prolonged progression-free survival with en bloc resection (hazard ratio, 0.74; P = .041), with 3-year freedom from locoregional recurrences of 78% and 90% for standard and en bloc approaches (P = .044). There were no differences in cardiopulmonary, gastrointestinal, or wound complications, as well as leak or chylothorax.ConclusionsOur experience demonstrates improved locoregional disease control with en bloc esophagectomy, with equivalent morbidity. Although these results may be multifactorial, including adequate clearance of both primary tumor and nodal micrometastases, this approach is safe and feasible. Surgeons have shifted away from the practice of en bloc esophagectomy, particularly in the era of neoadjuvant therapies. Although some still advocate for this radical approach, contemporary data establishing its superiority are sparse. We hypothesized that a more complete, radical resection could be completed in the setting of chemoradiation without adding morbidity. Patients undergoing esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for esophageal adenocarcinoma from 2006-2018 were evaluated. Outcomes after right transthoracic en bloc esophagectomy were compared with standard esophagectomy to determine the impact on outcomes. A Cox proportional hazard model was evaluated, and logistic regression was performed to determine the impact of en bloc resection on postoperative morbidity. A total of 604 patients were identified, including 133 (22%) who underwent modified en bloc esophagectomy. Positive margins were most likely to occur in standard esophagectomy (35 of 471, 7%) vs en bloc (3 of 133, 2%) (P = .026). En bloc resection yielded a greater lymph node harvest (27; interquartile range, 22-36), as compared to standard esophagectomy (22; interquartile range, 17-28), P < .001. Multivariable analysis demonstrated prolonged progression-free survival with en bloc resection (hazard ratio, 0.74; P = .041), with 3-year freedom from locoregional recurrences of 78% and 90% for standard and en bloc approaches (P = .044). There were no differences in cardiopulmonary, gastrointestinal, or wound complications, as well as leak or chylothorax. Our experience demonstrates improved locoregional disease control with en bloc esophagectomy, with equivalent morbidity. Although these results may be multifactorial, including adequate clearance of both primary tumor and nodal micrometastases, this approach is safe and feasible." @default.
• W3080965765 created "2020-09-01" @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5010129367 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5016730067 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5021347593 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5027152610 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5027351502 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5030797960 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5044064524 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5049826084 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5057175032 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5060288261 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5061975225 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5062181429 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5076621000 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5078248328 @default.
• W3080965765 creator A5082839000 @default.
• W3080965765 date "2021-04-01" @default.
• W3080965765 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W3080965765 title "Modified En Bloc Esophagectomy Compared With Standard Resection After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation" @default.
• W3080965765 cites W1921758104 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W1950985363 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W1968393217 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W1998603067 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2021433915 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2088976546 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2154444715 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2163815945 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2169906597 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2171487602 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2178272638 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2205052938 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2209079252 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2342815811 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2396036562 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2725434169 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2794224750 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2794541384 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2894958051 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2912516992 @default.
• W3080965765 cites W2992936944 @default.
• W3080965765 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.06.054" @default.
• W3080965765 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32857997" @default.
• W3080965765 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3080965765 type Work @default.
• W3080965765 sameAs 3080965765 @default.
• W3080965765 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W3080965765 countsByYear W30809657652021 @default.
• W3080965765 countsByYear W30809657652022 @default.
• W3080965765 countsByYear W30809657652023 @default.
• W3080965765 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5010129367 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5016730067 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5021347593 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5027152610 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5027351502 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5030797960 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5044064524 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5049826084 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5057175032 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5060288261 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5061975225 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5062181429 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5076621000 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5078248328 @default.
• W3080965765 hasAuthorship W3080965765A5082839000 @default.
• W3080965765 hasBestOaLocation W30809657651 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C119060515 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C207103383 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C2777297899 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C2778292576 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C2779742542 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C2780824555 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C2780849966 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C530470458 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C119060515 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C121608353 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C126322002 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C141071460 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C207103383 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C2777297899 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C2778292576 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C2779742542 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C2780824555 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C2780849966 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C44249647 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C530470458 @default.
• W3080965765 hasConceptScore W3080965765C71924100 @default.
• W3080965765 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W3080965765 hasLocation W30809657651 @default.
• W3080965765 hasOpenAccess W3080965765 @default.
• W3080965765 hasPrimaryLocation W30809657651 @default.
• W3080965765 hasRelatedWork W1563002699 @default.

• next