The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Improvement in the Results of Surgical Treatment of Advanced Squamous Esophageal Carcinoma During 15 Consecutive Years
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To document the clinicopathologic characteristics and survival of patients undergoing esophagectomy for squamous carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus, and to examine the factors contributing to improvements in outcome noted in patients with advanced carcinoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Japanese and some Western surgeons recently have reported that radical esophagectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy conferred a survival advantage to patients with esophageal carcinoma. The factors contributing to this improvement in results have not been well defined. METHODS: From 1981 to 1995, 419 patients with carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus underwent esophagectomy at the Keio University Hospital. The clinicopathologic characteristics and survival of patients treated between 1981 and 1987 were compared with those of patients treated between 1988 and 1995. Multivariate analysis using the Cox regression model was carried out to evaluate the impact of 15 variables on survival of patients with p stage IIa to IV disease. Several variables related to prognosis were examined to identify differences between the two time periods. RESULTS: The 5-year survival rate for all patients was 40.0%. The 5-year survival rate was 17.7% for p stage IIa to IV patients treated during the earlier period and 37.6% for those treated during the latter period. The Cox regression model revealed seven variables to be important prognostic factors. Of these seven, three (severity of postoperative complications, degree of residual tumor, and number of dissected mediastinal nodes) were found to be significantly different between the earlier and latter periods. CONCLUSIONS: The survival of patients undergoing surgery for advanced carcinoma (p stage IIa to IV) of the thoracic esophagus has improved during the past 15 years. The authors' data suggest that this improvement is due mainly to advances in surgical technique and perioperative management.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Esophageal Resection for Cancer of the Esophagus: Long-Term Function and Quality of Life
McLarty, A. J., Deschamps, C., Trastek, V. F., Allen, M. S., Pairolero, P. C., & Harmsen, W. S. (1997) · The Annals of Thoracic Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0003-4975(97)00125-2 · Cited by 272
Cited by
Ando, N., Iizuka, T., Ide, H., Ishida, K., Shinoda, M., Nishimaki, T., Takiyama, W., Watanabe, H., Isono, K., Aoyama, N., et al. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2003.12.095 · Cited by 722
Self-citationLaw, S., Wong, K.-H., Kwok, K.-F., Chu, K.-M., & Wong, J. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000143123.24556.1c · Cited by 408
Kato, K., Muro, K., Minashi, K., Ohtsu, A., Ishikura, S., Boku, N., Takiuchi, H., Komatsu, Y., Miyata, Y., & Fukuda, H. (2011) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.06.033 · Cited by 353
Metadata
- Authors
- Ando, N., Ozawa, S., Kitagawa, Y., Shinozawa, Y., & Kitajima, M.
- Venue
- Annals of Surgery
- Published
- 2000-08
- Volume
- 232
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 225-232
- ISSN
- 0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2039584595
- Cited by
- 540
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Improvement in the Results of Surgical Treatment of Advanced Squamous Esophageal Carcinoma During 15 Consecutive Years. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000658-200008000-00013
- The paper
- Ando, N., Ozawa, S., Kitagawa, Y., Shinozawa, Y., & Kitajima, M. (2000). Improvement in the Results of Surgical Treatment of Advanced Squamous Esophageal Carcinoma During 15 Consecutive Years. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200008000-00013
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.