ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2017
Clinical importance of colonoscopy in patients with gastric neoplasm undergoing endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer and long-term prognosis in patients following gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Association between gastrointestinal lesions in individuals undergoing gastroscopy and colonoscopy simultaneously: a retrospective, observational study.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Observational
- Risk factors and nomogram construction for predicting women with chronic pelvic pain:a cross-sectional population study.Heliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the usefulness of total colonoscopy (TCS) for patients undergoing gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and to assess risk factors for colorectal neoplasms.
methodsOf the 263 patients who underwent ESD at our department between May 2010 and December 2013, 172 patients undergoing TCS during a one-year period before and after ESD were targeted. After excluding patients with a history of surgery or endoscopic therapy for colorectal neoplasms, 158 patients were analyzed. Of the 868 asymptomatic patients who underwent TCS during the same period because of positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results, 158 patients with no history of either surgery or endoscopic therapy for colorectal neoplasms who were matched for age and sex served as the control group for comparison.
resultsTCS revealed adenoma less than 10 mm in 53 patients (33.6%), advanced adenoma in 17 (10.8%), early colorectal cancer in 5 (3.2%), and advanced colorectal cancer in 4 (2.5%). When the presence or absence of adenoma less than 10 mm, advanced adenoma, and colorectal cancer and the number of adenomas were compared between patients undergoing ESD and FIT-positive patients, there were no statistically significant differences in any of the parameters assessed. The patients undergoing ESD appeared to have the same risk of colorectal neoplasms as the FIT-positive patients. Colorectal neoplasms were clearly more common in men than in women (
conclusionIn patients undergoing gastric ESD, TCS appears to be important for detecting synchronous double neoplasms. Advanced adenoma and cancer were more common in patients with at least two of the following conditions: hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus. Caution is therefore especially warranted in patients with these risk factors.
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.