ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric indefinite for neoplasia: which lesions should be resected?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Approach for the Management of Indefinite-for-neoplasia Lesions Detected on Gastric Mucosal Biopsy].The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2023Review
- Convolutional neural network-based system for endocytoscopic diagnosis of early gastric cancer.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Combination of artificial intelligence-based endoscopy and miR148a methylation for gastric indefinite dysplasia diagnosis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2022Article
- Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of gastric dysplasia and early cancer: Current evidence and what the future may hold.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsThe management plan for gastric indefinite for neoplasia is undetermined, and endoscopic forceps biopsy might be inconclusive in ascertaining whether a resection is required. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric indefinite for neoplasia and to identify the factors highly predictive of true neoplasia. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis retrospective study was conducted in a single, tertiary, referral hospital between November 2008 and December 2015. A total of 109 gastric indefinite for neoplasia lesions from endoscopic forceps biopsy that were resected by ESD were included in the study. The clinical outcomes and endoscopic factors for prediction of true neoplasia were analyzed.
resultsA total of 99 patients (90.8%) were diagnosed with definite neoplasia after ESD and were classified as category 3 (n = 42), category 4 (n = 50), and category 5 (n = 7) according to the revised Vienna classification. The mean age of the patients was 65.8 ± 9.8 years. The mean lesion size was 10.7 ± 6.1 mm. The patient population predominantly consisted of male patients (70.6%). The en bloc and complete endoscopic resection rates were 98.2% and 94.5%, respectively. Factors associated with true neoplastic lesions were male sex (odds ratio [OR] 8.596, p = 0.008) and lesion size ≥ 5 mm (OR 11.355, p = 0.003). Factors associated with category 4-5 were male sex (OR 3.165, p = 0.021) and erosive change (OR 2.841, p = 0.031).
conclusionsEndoscopic resection for indefinite for neoplasia with larger lesions size and erosive changes, especially in males, should be considered when possible.
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.