ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2019
Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 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.
- Is endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection better than endoscopic submucosal dissection in treating large superficial esophageal neoplastic lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal-sigmoid laterally spreading tumors ≥10 cm: an analysis of 10 cases.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- Endoscopic Submucosal Tunnel Dissection as a Novel Therapeutic Technique in Patients With Barrett's Esophagus.Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment for superficial esophageal cancer. However, it has limitations in case of large superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs), in which submucosal injection cannot attain satisfactory lifting effects. Thus, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) was introduced as a new treatment for SESCNs presenting satisfying results. Many studies have tried to verify the efficacy of ESTD, yet no meta-analysis has been published until now.
methodsWe searched the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang, and CNKI dating up to February 1, 2019. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of ESTD and ESD for superficial esophageal cancers were enrolled. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to evaluate the quality of these studies. Eight articles were included that involved a total of 625 superficial esophageal cancer patients.
resultsOur analysis revealed that ESTD is superior to ESD as it has higher
conclusionsOur study implicates that ESTD is a potentially superior treatment to ESD for superficial esophageal cancer.
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.