Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,629

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Extended Transthoracic Resection Compared with Limited Transhiatal Resection for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus

Open access
Hulscher, Jan B.F., van Sandick, Johanna W., de Boer, Angela G.E.M., Wijnhoven, Bas P.L., Tijssen, Jan G.P., Fockens, Paul, Stalmeier, Peep F.M., ten Kate, Fiebo J.W., van Dekken, Herman, Obertop, Huug, Tilanus, Hugo W., van Lanschot, J. Jan B.·2002·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists about the best surgical treatment for esophageal carcinoma. METHODS: We randomly assigned 220 patients with adenocarcinoma of the mid-to-distal esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastric cardia involving the distal esophagus either to transhiatal esophagectomy or to transthoracic esophagectomy with extended en bloc lymphadenectomy. Principal end points were overall survival and disease-free survival. Early morbidity and mortality, the number of quality-adjusted life-years gained, and cost effectiveness were also determined. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were assigned to undergo transhiatal esophagectomy, and 114 to undergo transthoracic esophagectomy. Demographic characteristics and characteristics of the tumor were similar in the two groups. Perioperative morbidity was higher after transthoracic esophagectomy, but there was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (P=0.45). After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, 142 patients had died--74 (70 percent) after transhiatal resection and 68 (60 percent) after transthoracic resection (P=0.12). Although the difference in survival was not statistically significant, there was a trend toward a survival benefit with the extended approach at five years: disease-free survival was 27 percent in the transhiatal-esophagectomy group, as compared with 39 percent in the transthoracic-esophagectomy group (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -1 to 24 percent [the negative value indicates better survival with transhiatal resection]), whereas overall survival was 29 percent as compared with 39 percent (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -3 to 23 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Transhiatal esophagectomy was associated with lower morbidity than transthoracic esophagectomy with extended en bloc lymphadenectomy. Although median overall, disease-free, and quality-adjusted survival did not differ statistically between the groups, there was a trend toward improved long-term survival at five years with the extended transthoracic approach.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa022343

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 1,629

Metadata

Authors
Hulscher, J. B. F., van Sandick, J. W., de Boer, A. G. E. M., Wijnhoven, B. P. L., Tijssen, J. G. P., Fockens, P., Stalmeier, P. F. M., ten Kate, F. J. W., van Dekken, H., Obertop, H., Tilanus, H. W., & van Lanschot, J. J. B.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2002-11-21
Volume
347
Issue
21
Pages
1662-1669
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2113217158
Cited by
1,629
References
7
FWCI
47.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Extended Transthoracic Resection Compared with Limited Transhiatal Resection for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa022343
The paper
Hulscher, J. B. F., van Sandick, J. W., de Boer, A. G. E. M., Wijnhoven, B. P. L., Tijssen, J. G. P., Fockens, P., Stalmeier, P. F. M., ten Kate, F. J. W., van Dekken, H., Obertop, H., Tilanus, H. W., & van Lanschot, J. J. B. (2002). Extended Transthoracic Resection Compared with Limited Transhiatal Resection for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa022343

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.