ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2018
Short-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial cecal tumors: a comparison between extension and nonextension into the appendiceal orifice.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2018. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Migration of a Hem-O-Lok clip into the cecal lumen following laparoscopic appendectomy: a case report.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic and laparoscopic treatment of ileocecal laterally spreading tumor with concomitant appendiceal adenoma: A case report and review of literature.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Real-world learning curve analysis of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a large multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
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
backgroundFew studies have investigated the use of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice. Herein, we assessed the feasibility and safety of ESD for cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice.
methodsWe retrospectively examined the outcomes of ESD for 78 patients with 78 cecal tumors (male/female ratio, 40/38; mean [standard deviation, SD] age, 67 [9] years; mean [SD] tumor size, 32 [15] mm), who underwent ESD at the Hiroshima University Hospital between October 2008 and March 2016. The indication for ESD in cecal tumors extending into the appendiceal orifice was recognition of the distal edge of the lesion in the appendix. They were classified into two groups: patients with cecal tumors extending (Group A: 29 patients, 29 tumors) and not extending (Group B: 49 patients, 49 tumors) into the appendiceal orifice. We compared the outcomes of ESD between both groups.
resultsNo significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics were observed between both groups. The rate of severe submucosal fibrosis in Group A (48%) was significantly higher than that in Group B (24%) (
conclusionsESD for cecal tumors with extension into the appendiceal orifice is effective and safe.
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.