ArticleBMC cancer2019
Multiband mucosectomy versus endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic submucosal excavation for GI submucosal tumors: short and long term follow-up.
Article in BMC cancer, 2019. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Endoscopic Therapies for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Endoscopic Muscularis Superficialis Dissection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic calabash technique for gastric mesenchymal tumours: A low hanging fruit or a novel endoscopic technique?World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Factors predicting technical difficulties during endoscopic submucosal excavation for gastric submucosal tumor.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of 3 different endoscopic dissection techniques for upper gastrointestinal (GI) submucosal tumours (SMTs).
methodsData for 135 patients withGI SMTs who underwent multiband mucosectomy (MBM), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), or endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE) were retrospectively assessed. The en bloc resection rate, endoscopic complete resection rate, operation time, potential complications and local recurrence rate were compared.
resultsNo significant differences were observed in the rate of endoscopic complete resections and pathologic complete resections among the three groups. For SMTs > 15 mm in width, the lowest en bloc resection rate was found for MBM (P = 0.000). MBM was also associated with the shortest procedure time, lowest perforation rate and lowest rate of major bleeding. ESE was the most effective procedure for muscularis propria (MP) lesions but was associated with the longest operation time (P < 0.01). The ESD and ESE groups had similar perforation rates (P > 0.05). No differences were observed in 4-year local recurrence rates among the groups (P = 0.945).
conclusionsMBM is a simple and effective method for the treatment of small SMTs and achieves clinical success rates similar to those of ESD and ESE. However, ESD and ESE are preferable for larger and deep lesions and are associated with a longer operation time. Nonetheless, all 3 techniques resulted in a low 4-year local recurrence rate. Large-scale randomized clinical trials are needed to further investigate these results.
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.