Esophageal carcinoma surgery belongs to high risk subjects. Esophageal carcinoma radical resection and reconstruction is popular in the surgical field and one of the most challenging operations. How to understand, evaluate and treat risks, take corresponding measures, so as to reduce and avoid risks, has been the focus of clinical attention and research. we base on clinical work practices, review the relevant literatures, try to review the risk factors of Esophageal cancer surgery, evaluation methods, risk classification, and its preventive countermeasures for preliminary thinking and discussions, to provide a useful reference to development of a scientific, rational and practical Esophageal cancer surgery risk scoring system.
ObjectiveTo review the current status of case studies on drug comprehensive clinical evaluation published in China in the past decade, providing references for the standardized implementation of evaluation. MethodsA scoping review was conducted on the published cases of drug comprehensive clinical evaluation in China. The analysis was carried out from themes, dimensions, methods, and quality control. Descriptive analysis was used to analyze the evaluation themes, dimension, method, and quality control of the included studies. Meanwhile, VOSviewer 1.6.20 software was used to conduct co-occurrence network analysis of author's affiliation and evaluation dimensions. ResultsThe research on comprehensive drug clinical evaluation has developed the fastest in Beijing. Medical institutions, universities, and scientific institutions are the main research institutions. Universities and their affiliated hospitals have stronger collaboration, while some local hospitals show research isolation. The evaluation themes focus on chronic diseases and cancer, with some repetitions. The evaluation methods mainly rely on descriptive analysis. In nearly half of the cases, evidence-based medicine methods are inadequately applied. Only about 5% of the cases have conducted real-world research. For cases with the same theme, results may conflict due to differences in methods or data sources. The value integration mainly relies on quantitative scoring, which is lacking in 37.05% cases. Only 14.03% of the cases report quality control. In 31.87% of cases, the data provided by pharmaceutical companies were used, with a lack of conflict-of-interest disclosures. ConclusionAlthough the comprehensive clinical evaluation of drugs in China has developed rapidly, there are problems such as non-standardized methods and differences in data sources. It is necessary to improve the scientificity and decision-making value of evaluation results by coordinating theme selection, strengthening quality control, and developing reporting guideline.