ArticleJournal of clinical gastroenterology2017
Comparison of Endoscopic Resection and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Patients With Early Esophageal Cancer.
Article in Journal of clinical gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced Endoscopic Resection Techniques in Cirrhosis-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Pooled it
- Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection vs. Surgery for Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Case Report: Endoscopic submucosal tunneling dissection using a golden knife for a giant gastric cancer lesion: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- A cost-effectiveness modeling study of treatment interventions for stage I to III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2022Article
- Comparison of Long-Term Survival Between cT1N0 Stage Esophageal Cancer Patients Receiving Endoscopic Dissection and Esophagectomy: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Endoscopic resection versus esophagectomy for early esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- m6A Regulators Is Differently Expressed and Correlated With Immune Response of Esophageal Cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Focus on patients with early esophageal cancer-a prognostic nomogram.Translational cancer research · 2020Article
- Resection of early esophageal neoplasms: The pendulum swings from surgical to endoscopic management.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019Review
- Long-term effects of radiation prior to surgery and chemotherapy on survival of esophageal cancer undergoing surgery.Medicine · 2019Observational
- Endoscopic Treatment Versus Esophagectomy for Early-Stage Esophageal Cancer: a Population-Based Study Using Propensity Score Matching.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017Article
- Contemporary issues in endoscopic resection for esophageal squamous cell cancer.Annals of translational medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether endoscopic resection (ER) and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) are safe and effective for treating squamous intraepithelial neoplasia of the esophagus. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed a total of 99 consecutive patients with pathologically confirmed early esophageal cancer between December 2007 and 2011. ER was performed in 59 patients, whereas MIE was performed in 40 patients. We compared the 2 groups according to R0 resection rates, treatment-related complications, mean hospital stay, local recurrence rates, and 3- and 4-year overall survival.
resultsNo significant differences were found in the R0 resection rates between ER and MIE (94.9% vs. 97.5%, P>0.05). The occurrence rate of minor complications in the ER group was significantly lower than that in the thoracoscopic esophagectomy group (11.8% vs. 32.5%, P>0.05). The mean operative time in the ER group was 74±23 minutes, which was significantly shorter than that in the MIE group (298±46 min). The average length of hospital stay in the ER group was significantly shorter than that in the MIE group (P<0.001). No significant differences were observed in the local recurrence rates between the 2 groups (P>0.05). Similarly, no differences were found in the 3-year survival rate (ER: 96.6%, vs. MIE: 97.5%, P>0.05) and 4-year survival rate (ER: 91.5% vs. MIE: 90%, P>0.05) between the 2 groups.
conclusionsER achieves the same positive results as MIE in the treatment of early esophageal cancer and is associated with a lower complication rate, a shorter recovery time, and a similar survival rate. However, multiple ER procedures were required for several patients in this study.
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.