Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26656367›Full record

Observational studyMedicine2015

Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Treating Large Early Esophageal Squamous Cell Neoplasia.

Wen-Lun Wang, I-Wei Chang, Chien-Chuan Chen, Chi-Yang Chang, Lein-Ray Mo, Jaw-Town Lin, Hsiu-Po Wang, Ching-Tai Lee

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03183115 (Preemptive Radiofrequency Ablation for Esophageal Speckled Lugol Background Mucosa to Prevent Metachronous Neoplastic Recurrence After Complete Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ~A Randomized Controlled Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03183115 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Preemptive Radiofrequency Ablation for Esophageal Speckled Lugol Background Mucosa to Prevent Metachronous Neoplastic Recurrence After Complete Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection ~A Randomized Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorE-DA HospitalRan2016 to 2026Enrolled100ConditionsEsophageal Squamous Cell NeoplasmArmsRadiofrequency ablation, Endoscopy, Lugol's Solution (1.5%)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of early esophageal squamous neoplasia.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2017
    Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Wen-Lun WangFrom the Department of Internal Medicine (W-LW, C-YC, L-RM, J-TL, C-TL) and Department of Pathology, E-Da Hospital/I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (I-WC); Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (C-CC, J-TL, H-PW); and School of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei City, Taiwan (J-TL).
I-Wei Chang
Chien-Chuan Chen
Chi-Yang Chang
Lein-Ray Mo
Jaw-Town Lin
Hsiu-Po Wang
Ching-Tai Lee
TLC Precision Wafer Technology (United States) · USFu Jen Catholic University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can potentially be applied for early esophageal squamous cell neoplasia (ESCN); however, no study has directly compared these 2 modalities.We retrospectively enrolled the patients with flat-type "large" (length ≥3 cm extending ≥1/2 of the circumference of esophagus) early ESCNs treated endoscopically. The main outcome measurements were complete response at 12 months, and adverse events.Of a total of 65 patients, 18 were treated with RFA and 47 with ESD. The procedure time of RFA was significantly shorter than that of ESD (126.6 vs 34.8 min; P < 0.001). The complete resection rate of ESD and complete response rate after primary RFA were 89.3% and 77.8%, respectively. Based on the histological evaluation of the post-ESD specimens showed 14 of 47 (29.8%) had histological upstaging compared with the pre-ESD biopsies, and 4 of them had lymphovascular invasion requiring chemoradiation or surgery. After additional therapy for residual lesions, 46 (97.9%) patients in the ESD group and 17 (94.4%) patients in the RFA group achieved a complete response at 12 months. Four patients (8.5%) developed major procedure-related adverse events in the ESD group, but none in the RFA group. In patients with lesions occupying more than 3/4 of the circumference, a significantly higher risk of esophageal stenosis was noted in the ESD group compared with RFA group (83% vs 27%, P = 0.01), which required more sessions of dilatation to resolve the symptoms (median, 13 vs 3, P = 0.04). There were no procedure-related mortality or neoplastic progression in either group; however, 1 patient who received ESD and 1 who received RFA developed local recurrence during a median follow-up period of 32.4 (range, 13-68) and 18.0 (range, 13-41) months, respectively.RFA and ESD are equally effective in the short-term treatment of early flat large ESCNs; however, more adverse events occur with ESD, especially in lesions extending more than 3/4 of the circumference. RFA does not allow for pathology to evaluate the curability after ablation, and thus currently the use for invasive ESCNs should be conservative until longer follow-up studies are available.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAlcohol DrinkingBody Mass IndexCatheter AblationDissectionEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagoscopyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Squamous CellOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesSmoking

Identifiers

PMID26656367
PMCPMC5008512
OpenAlexW2215797527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.