Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28567695›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for laterally spreading tumors involving the appendiceal orifice.

Tomoaki Tashima, Ken Ohata, Kouichi Nonaka, Eiji Sakai, Yohei Minato, Hajime Horiuchi, Nobuyuki Matsuhashi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in special locations.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019
    Review
  7. 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

7 authors.

Tomoaki TashimaDepartment of Gastroenterology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, 5-9-22 Higashi-gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-8625, Japan.
Ken OhataDepartment of Gastroenterology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, 5-9-22 Higashi-gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-8625, Japan. ken.ohata1974@gmail.com.
Kouichi NonakaDepartment of Gastroenterology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, 5-9-22 Higashi-gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-8625, Japan.
Eiji SakaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, 5-9-22 Higashi-gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-8625, Japan.
Yohei MinatoDepartment of Gastroenterology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, 5-9-22 Higashi-gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-8625, Japan.
Hajime HoriuchiDepartment of Pathology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Nobuyuki MatsuhashiDepartment of Gastroenterology, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, 5-9-22 Higashi-gotanda, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-8625, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the endoscopic resection of laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) involving the appendiceal orifice remains technically difficult, such lesions are usually treated by surgical resection. However, with recent advances in endoscopic devices, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become feasible and may be safely performed even for lesions involving the appendiceal orifice. Therefore, in order to assess the validity of endoscopic treatment for such lesions, we retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of ESD.

methodsA total of 30 patients with LSTs extending to within 10 mm of the appendiceal orifice (Group AO) and 122 patients with cecal LSTs located away from the appendiceal orifice (Group C) who were treated between December 2011 and September 2015 were retrospectively enrolled in the present study. The indications for ESD were determined by the preoperative endoscopic diagnosis made on the basis of Kudo's pit pattern classification. Based on these preoperative endoscopic diagnoses, 8 of the 30 enrolled patients underwent surgical resection as the initial treatment, because the tumor showed deep invasion beyond the orifice and/or a VN pit pattern was visible. The treatment outcomes (en bloc R0 resection rates, tumor size, procedure time, and complication rates) were compared between the two groups.

resultsThe sensitivity and specificity for the cancer diagnosis were 81.8 and 94.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the en bloc R0 resection rate between Group AO and Group C (90.9 vs. 95.9%, P = 0.23). Furthermore, there were also no differences in the mean tumor size (30.0 ± 20.8 vs. 34.9 ± 14.5 mm, P = 0.17) or mean OR time (55.0 ± 39.2 vs. 58.9 ± 48.2 min P = 0.72) between the two groups. One case from Group AO (4.5%) was complicated by a perforation, which was successfully managed endoscopically.

conclusionsAlthough proficiency in endoscopic techniques is required, our results indicate that LSTs involving the appendiceal orifice can be successfully treated by ESD.

Indexed as

DissectionEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionEndoscopyAgedAppendixCecal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIntestinal MucosaMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAppendiceal orificeEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)ESD strategyLaterally spreading tumor (LST)Preoperative endoscopic diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID28567695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.