Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and… | ScholarDeck

Paper

Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

New research · Thoracic Surgery

Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 9h

Meta-analysisDiseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus· Jul 2026

Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nader M Hanna, Bright Huo, Zuhaib M Mir, John Agzarian

Read paper

Esophageal SurgeryMeta-analysisTreatmentQ2IF 2.2

Endoscopic resection shows no survival difference versus esophagectomy for T1b esophageal cancer

Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for T1bN0M0 esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nader M Hanna … John Agzarian

Diseases of the esophagus · Jul 2026 · Q2 in General Medicine

Background

Esophagectomy remains the standard of care for T1b esophageal cancer.

Methods

Ten retrospective studies were identified comprising 2491 patients who underwent endoscopic resection (n = 890) or esophagectomy (n = 1601).

n = 2491 patients

Results

esophagectomy trended toward better survival, but not significantly

HR by subgroup · 95% CI

More results

We compared patients with T1b esophageal cancer who underwent endoscopic resection or esophagectomy.

Outcomes were 5-year overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (cancer specific survival), recurrence, and mortality.

Mean age was 65.7 years with 16.1% female.

More results

Recurrence was 18.1% after esophagectomy and 17.7% after endoscopic resection.

“

Conclusion

Randomized controlled trials are needed to reduce patient heterogeneity.

Read paper

0 comments

No comments yet. Be the first.

ScholarDeck.

Join the discussion on this paper

Create your profile

Related papers

Latest Foundational

Cohort Study

18.0 versus 8.0 months

IV-A patients lived more than twice as long after surgery

Cohort Study

80.0%

poor responders recurred locally, not distantly, after surgery

Cohort Study

87.5% vs. 71.0%

neoadjuvant patients were far more likely to be alive at 2 years

Cohort Study

HR 0.60

achieving textbook outcome lowers mortality risk after gastrectomy

Cohort Study

OR 16.07

open surgery raised the odds of early conduit emptying delay

Cohort Study

OR 1.95

neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy nearly doubled the odds of postoperative pneumonia vs surgery alone

Cohort Study

HR 1.51

Leaks requiring reoperation were linked to about 50% higher adjusted risk of death

Cohort Study

AUC 0.847

score correctly separates high from low risk patients most of the time