ArticleJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2020
Endoscopic features of esophageal adenocarcinoma derived from short-segment versus long-segment Barrett's esophagus.
Article in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Optical Endoscopic Evaluation and EUS for Differentiating T1a and T1b Barrett's Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Pooled it
- The poorly differentiated component in endoscopic biopsy predicts submucosal invasion in superficial Barrett's esophageal adenocarcinoma.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2026Article
- Review
- Sponge cytology combined with endoscopy in patients with long-segment Barrett's esophagus: A retrospective case series and literature review.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Review
- Long- vs short-segment Barrett's esophagus-derived adenocarcinoma: clinical features and outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Review
- Clinicopathological Characteristics of Superficial Barrett's Adenocarcinoma in a Japanese Population: A Retrospective, Multicenter Study.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2022Article
- Whole circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial adenocarcinoma in long-segment Barrett's esophagus: A case report.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Article
- Endoscopy and Barrett's Esophagus: Current Perspectives in the US and Japan.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2021Article
- Endoscopic features of esophageal adenocarcinoma derived from short-segment versus long-segment Barrett's esophagus.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2020Article
- The Efficacy of Linked Color Imaging in the Endoscopic Diagnosis of Barrett's Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Gastroenterology research and practice · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe study aims to clarify the endoscopic features and clinicopathological differences in superficial Barret's esophageal adenocarcinoma (s-BEA) derived from short-segment Barrett's esophagus (SSBE) and long-segment Barrett's esophagus (LSBE).
methodsWe reviewed data of 130 patients (141 lesions) with pathologically confirmed s-BEA (SSBE: 95 patients and 95 lesions; LSBE: 35 patients and 46 lesions). We analyzed endoscopic and clinicopathological features of s-BEA in patients with SSBE and LSBE.
resultsThe distribution of lesions according to macroscopic findings were as follows (s-BEA in SSBE vs LSBE): flat type (0-IIb), 3.2% (3/95) vs 32.6% (15/46) (P < 0.001); accompanied type 0-IIb, 2.1% (2/95) vs 21.7% (10/46) (P < 0.001); and complex type (0-I + IIb, 0-IIa + IIc, etc.), 30.5% (29/95) vs 50.0% (23/46) (P = 0.025). Complex-type s-BEAs had high incidences of T1b invasions and poorly differentiated components (simple type: 22.5% [20/89] and 18.0% [16/89]; complex type: 59.6% [31/52] and 44.2% [23/52], P < 0.001 and P = 0.002, respectively). In SSBE, 72.6% (69/95) of lesions were located at the right anterior wall (P = 0.01). All flat-type or depressed-type lesions derived from SSBE were identified as reddish areas, whereas only 65.2% (15/23) from LSBE were identified as reddish areas (P < 0.001).
conclusionsIn LSBE, flat-type, accompanied-type 0-IIb, and complex-type lesions were significantly more prevalent. Furthermore, complex-type s-BEAs tended to have T1b invasions and poorly differentiated components. S-BEAs in LSBE should be more carefully evaluated on endoscopic appearance including flat-type and complex-type lesions than in SSBE.
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.