ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2016
Emerging Concepts for the Endoscopic Management of Superficial Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 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.
- Histopathological Assessment of the Endoscopic Resection Specimen.Visceral medicine · 2024Review
- Endoscopic management of esophageal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Review
- Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of esophageal adenocarcinoma: introduction of Japan Esophageal Society classification of Barrett's esophagus.Journal of gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Identifying DNA methylation biomarkers for non-endoscopic detection of Barrett's esophagus.Science translational medicine · 2018Article
- Risk of metastasis in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus: a multicenter retrospective study in a Japanese population.Journal of gastroenterology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic therapy has revolutionized the treatment of Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or intramucosal adenocarcinoma by allowing preservation of the esophagus in many patients who would previously have had an esophagectomy. This paradigm shift initially occurred at high-volume centers in North America and Europe but now is becoming mainstream therapy. There is a lack of uniform guidelines and algorithms for the management of these patients. Our aim was to review important concepts and pitfalls in the endoscopic management of superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma.
methodsA small group colloquium consisting of gastroenterologists, surgeons, and pathologists reviewed published data and discussed personal and institutional experiences with endotherapy for HGD and superficial esophageal adenocarcinoma.
resultsThe group reviewed data and provided recommendations and management algorithms for seven areas pertaining to endoscopic therapy for Barrett's HGD and superficial adenocarcinoma: (1) patient selection and evaluation; (2) imaging and biopsy techniques; (3) devices; (4) indications for resection versus ablation; (5) ER specimen handling, processing, and pathologic evaluation; (6) patient care and follow-up after endoscopic therapy; and (7) complications of endoscopic therapy and treatment options.
conclusionsEndoscopic therapy is preferred over esophagectomy for most patients with HGD or intramucosal adenocarcinoma, and may be applicable to select patients with submucosal tumors. Clear guidelines and management algorithms will aid physicians and centers embarking on endoscopic therapy and enable a standardized approach to the management of these patients that is applicable internationally.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26691147What 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.