ReviewClinical endoscopy2016
Interpretation of Pathologic Margin after Endoscopic Resection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor.
Review in Clinical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nationwide Multicenter Study of Advanced Endoscopic Resection and Malignant Risk Model for Gastric Myogenic Tumors (GASTRO Trial).Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Surgical outcomes of limb-salvage surgery with or without femoral vein reconstruction for soft tissue sarcomas of the thigh.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Efficiency of an endoscopic resection strategy for management of submucosal tumors < 20 mm in the upper gastrointestinal tract.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Is the Surgical Margin in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Different?Visceral medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interpretation of the pathologic margin of a specimen from a resected tumor is important because local recurrence can be predicted by the presence of tumor cells in the resection margin. Although a sufficient resection margin is recommended in the resection of gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma, it is not usually regarded strictly in cases of mesenchymal tumor, especially gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), because the tumor is usually encapsulated or well demarcated, and not infiltrative. Therefore, margin positivity is not rare in the pathological evaluation of surgically or endoscopically resected GIST, and does not always indicate incomplete resection. Although a GIST may have a tumor-positive pathologic margin, complete resection may be achieved if no residual tumor is visible, and long-term survival can be predicted as in the cases with a negative pathologic margin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.