ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Safety analysis of laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for selected gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a propensity score-matched study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Endoscopic Cooperative Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison Among Endoscopic, Laparoscopic, and Open Resection for Relatively Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (<5 cm): A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Short-term safety and feasibility of laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastric subepithelial tumors: a retrospective observational study of the first single-center experience in Mongolia.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison Between endoscopic submucosal dissection and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery for non-ampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective cohort study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- 2024 Chinese expert consensus on clinical utilization of laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastric tumors.Chinese medical journal · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic surgical approaches for various locations of gastrointestinal stromal tumours.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Review
- Laparoscopic and Endoscopic cooperative surgery as Rescue-treatment for Advanced gastric Cancer in patients Unfit for Surgery (LE-RACUS): protocol for a feasibility study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- Perforation-free removal of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: Endoscopic inversion and strangulation of muscle layer and resection (EISMR).Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Lap-Endo cooperative surgery (LECS) in gastric GIST: updates and future advances.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Review
- Effects of endoscopic therapy and surgical resection on long-term survival outcomes in patients with duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a surveillance, epidemiology, and end result program analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Comparable long-term survival of patients with colorectal or gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors treated with endoscopic vs. surgical resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Robotic endoscopic cooperative surgery for colorectal tumors: a feasibility study (with video).Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Safety, efficacy, and selection strategy of laparoscopic local gastrectomy for gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the esophagogastric junction.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- On the Track of New Endoscopic Alternatives for the Treatment of Selected Gastric GISTs-A Pilot Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Clinicopathologic and Surgical Characteristics Study of 151 Cases of GIST.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2021Article
- Surgical Resection Is Still Better Than Endoscopic Resection for Patients With 2-5 cm Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Investigation of the prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss based on propensity score matching: a retrospective observational study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2020Observational
- Endoscopic or Surgical Resection for Patients with 2-5cm Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Single-Center 12-Year Experience from China.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
- Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
- Clinical feasibility and safety of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors dissection : A new surgical technique for treating gastric GISTs.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) is a safe alternative to endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for select gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) that are <2 cm in size. To date, there have been no randomized studies comparing the feasibility of these two techniques. Therefore, we compared their feasibility and safety using the propensity score matching method in this study.
methodsThis was a single-center, retrospective, propensity score-matched study of patients who underwent resection of selected gastric GISTs between 2004 and 2014. All patients underwent curative resection for pathologically diagnosed small gastric GISTs. The primary aim was to determine intraoperative complications and postoperative courses. To overcome selection biases, we performed a 1:1 match using five covariates, including age, gender, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, and tumor location, to generate propensity scores.
resultsIn total, 32 patients treated with LECS and 102 patients treated with ESD were balanced into 30 pairs. The rate of intraoperative complications was significantly lower in the LECS group than in the ESD group (P = 0.029). LECS patients had less intraoperative bleeding than did ESD patients (15.0 ml [range 9.5-50.0 ml] vs. 43.5 ml [range 22.3-56.0 ml], P = 0.004). The two groups had similar postoperative courses. There was no difference in the reoperation rate between the two groups (P = 0.112). The ESD group had a shorter operating time than did the LECS group (41.5 min vs. 96.5 min, P < 0.001). However, during a follow-up of 57.9 (±28.9) months, the recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (0.0 vs. 6.7 %, respectively; P = 0.256).
conclusionsLECS for selected gastric GIST patients is feasible and is associated with a better intraoperative outcome and an equal postoperative course compared with the results of ESD.
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.