ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Clinical outcomes of no residual disease in the specimen after endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasms.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive Model of Nonneoplastic Pathology after Endoscopic Resection of Gastric Epithelial Neoplasia.Gut and liver · 2020Article
- Clinicopathologic Characteristics and Long-Term Outcome of Gastric Cancer Patients with Family History: Seven-Year Follow-Up Study for Korean Health Check-Up Subjects.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2020Article
- Predictors of upstage diagnosis after endoscopic resection of gastric low-grade dysplasia.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Negative pathology after endoscopic resection of gastric epithelial neoplasms: importance of pit dysplasia.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2017Article
- Clinical features of negative pathologic results after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.Surgical endoscopy · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNo residual disease (NRD) can be found in the specimen after endoscopic resection (ER) of biopsy-proven gastric neoplasm. This study aimed to evaluate the endoscopic and pathologic characteristics of patients with NRD and identify the cause and long-term prognosis.
methodsMedical records of patients who underwent ER for biopsy-proven gastric neoplasms at a single tertiary hospital between January 2005 and November 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients whose post-ER histology was revealed as NRD were included. Overall incidence, clinicopathologic characteristics, cause, and long-term prognosis were analyzed.
resultsNRD was detected in 143 (3.2%) of 4401 cases of gastric neoplasms treated with ER. Mean endoscopic size of the initial lesion was 8.15 ± 6.64 mm; in 93 cases (65.0%), the lesion was located in the lower third of the stomach. Initial pathologic diagnosis was as follows: adenoma (n = 110), carcinoma (n = 29), and atypical gland (n = 4). The causes of NRD were minute lesions removed by biopsy in 140 patients, pathologic misdiagnoses in two, and localization error in one. Local recurrence was detected in five patients (3.6%) with minute lesions during follow-up and treated with argon plasma coagulation (n = 4) or re-ER (n = 1). Synchronous (n = 5, 3.6%) and metachronous gastric lesions (n = 6, 4.3%) were also detected during follow-up.
conclusionsThe main cause of NRD was minute lesions which might be completely removed by initial diagnostic biopsy. These cases showed a minimal rate of local recurrence and synchronous or metachronous gastric neoplasms. Careful follow-up is also mandatory for detection of residual disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26091988What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.