Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30328950›Full record

ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2018

Validation of classic and expanded criteria for endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer: 7 years of experience in a Western tertiary cancer center.

Ernesto Quaresma Mendonça, Fernanda Cristina Simões Pessorrusso, Marcus Fernando Kodama Pertille Ramos, Carlos Eduardo Jacob, Joel Fernandez de Oliveira, Maria Sylvia Ribeiro, Adriana Safatle-Ribeiro, Bruno Zilberstein, Ulysses Ribeiro Júnior, Fauze Maluf-Filho

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ernesto Quaresma MendonçaUnidade de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP), Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Fernanda Cristina Simões PessorrussoUnidade de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP), Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Marcus Fernando Kodama Pertille RamosDepartamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Carlos Eduardo JacobDepartamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Joel Fernandez de OliveiraUnidade de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP), Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Maria Sylvia RibeiroUnidade de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP), Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Adriana Safatle-RibeiroUnidade de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP), Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Bruno ZilbersteinDepartamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Ulysses Ribeiro JúniorDepartamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Fauze Maluf-FilhoUnidade de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Instituto do Cancer do Estado de Sao Paulo (ICESP), Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
Universidade de São Paulo · BRInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOur aim was to evaluate the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society criteria for endoscopic submucosal resection of early gastric cancer (EGC) based on the experience in a Brazilian cancer center.

methodsWe included all patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal resection for gastric lesions between February 2009 and October 2016. Demographic data and information regarding the endoscopic resection, pathological report and follow-up were obtained. Statistical calculations were performed with Fisher's exact test and chi-square tests, with 95% confidence intervals.

resultsIn total, 76% of the 51 lesions were adenocarcinomas, 16% were adenomas, and 8% had other diagnoses. The average size was 19.9 mm (±11.7). The average procedure length was 113.9 minutes (±71.4). The complication rate was 21.3%, with only one patient who needed surgical treatment (transmural perforation). Among the adenocarcinomas, 39.5% met the classic criteria for curability, 31.6% met the expanded criteria and 28.9% met the criteria for noncurative resection. Analysis of the indication criteria and curability revealed differences among cases with "only-by-size" expanded criteria (64.28%), other expanded criteria (40%) and classic criteria (89.47%), with a p-value of 0.049. During follow-up (15.8 months; ±14.3), 86.1% of the EGC patients had no recurrence. When well-differentiated and poorly differentiated lesions or lesions included in the classic and expanded criteria were compared, there were no differences in recurrence. The noncurative group presented a higher recurrence rate than the classic group (p=0.014).

conclusionThese results suggest that the Japanese endoscopic submucosal resection criteria might be useful for endoscopic treatment of EGC in Western countries.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdenomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrazilEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesStomach NeoplasmsTertiary Care Centers

Identifiers

PMID30328950
PMCPMC6157092
OpenAlexW2896690995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.