ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection for lesions on the proximal location between remnant and entire stomach.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mastering gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: A learning curve analysis of over 100 consecutive cases performed by Western endoscopist.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2026Article
- Impact of gastric neoplasms location on clinical outcome of patients treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Current status of evaluation and treatment of early-stage remnant gastric cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Review
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
backgroundTumors located on the proximal stomach are associated with a longer procedure time and lower en-block resection of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Additionally, it is more difficult to perform ESD for lesions after distal gastrectomy because of the narrow inner space. We aimed to evaluate the therapeutic outcomes of ESD for lesions on the remnant stomach compared with those on the upper third of the entire stomach.
methodsA total of 135 patients with a neoplasm located on the proximal stomach who received ESD between Aug 2008 and Dec 2016 were enrolled. We retrospectively reviewed en-bloc resection rate, complete resection rate, and complication rate according to whether distal gastrectomy was performed. Clinical outcomes were compared among the 1:2 propensity-matched groups.
resultsBetween the remnant stomach and entire stomach, the en-bloc [92% (23/25) and 92.0% (46/50), respectively; P = 1.000] and complete resection [84% (21/25) and 88.0 (44/50), respectively; P = 0.723] rates were not significantly different. In patients with lesions that indicated ESD, there was no significant difference in en-bloc and complete resection rates. In a multivariable analysis, submucosal fibrosis [odds ratio (OR) 5.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-30.7] and submucosa invasive cancer (OR 10.1, 95% CI 1.4-74.3) were independent risk factors for incomplete resection.
conclusionsESD is a feasible therapeutic option for lesions located on the proximal stomach regardless the operation history of distal gastrectomy. However, the complete resection rate decreases for lesions with submucosal fibrosis or the submucosa invasion.
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.