Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31816675›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2020

Endoscopic Ultrasonography Miniature Probe Performance for Depth Diagnosis of Early Gastric Cancer with Suspected Submucosal Invasion.

Hiroyuki Takamaru, Shigetaka Yoshinaga, Hajime Takisawa, Ichiro Oda, Hitoshi Katai, Shigeki Sekine, Kazuhiro Taniguchi, Yutaka Saito

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. An artificial intelligence system for comprehensive pathologic outcome prediction in early gastric cancer through endoscopic image analysis (with video).Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hiroyuki TakamaruDivisions of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7019-6331
Shigetaka YoshinagaDivisions of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2368-878X
Hajime TakisawaDivisions of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-3706-2291
Ichiro OdaDivisions of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-8666-127X
Hitoshi KataiDivisions of Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-1547-8421
Shigeki SekineDivisions of Pathology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0884-8981
Kazuhiro TaniguchiDivisions of Pathology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4212-4776
Yutaka SaitoDivisions of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2296-8373
National Cancer Center Hospital East · JPTokyo National Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: The accurate assessment of the depth of invasion of early gastric cancer (EGC) is critical to determine the most appropriate treatment option. However, it is difficult to distinguish shallow submucosal (SM1) invasion from deeper submucosal (SM2) invasion. We investigated the diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) using a miniature probe for EGC with suspected SM invasion. Methods: From April 2008 to June 2018, EGCs with suspected SM invasion were analyzed retrospectively. The EGCs examined by a 20 MHz high-frequency miniature probe was included in our study. Esophago-gastric junction cancers and patients treated by chemotherapy before resection were excluded. The sensitivity and specificity for the detection of SM2 invasion by EUS were compared with those of white light imaging (WLI). Additionally, factors related to depth underestimation or overestimation were investigated using multivariate analysis. Results: A total of 278 EGCs in 259 patients were included in the final analysis. The sensitivity and specificity for SM2 or deeper by EUS were 73.7% (87/118) and 74.4% (119/160), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity by WLI were 47.5% (56/118) and 68.1% (109/160), respectively. The sensitivity of EUS was significantly superior to that of conventional endoscopy (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that an anterior location of the EGC was an independent risk factor for underestimation by EUS (odds ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 9.8; p=0.03). Conclusions: The depth diagnostic performance for EGCs with suspected SM invasion using EUS was satisfactory and superior to that of conventional endoscopy. Additionally, it is important to recognize factors that may lead to misdiagnosis in those lesions.

Indexed as

Stomach NeoplasmsAgedEndosonographyFemaleGastric MucosaHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingRetrospective StudiesEndosonographyInvasion depthStomach neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID31816675
PMCPMC7492497
OpenAlexW2995762219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.