ArticleGut and liver2020
Endoscopic Ultrasonography Miniature Probe Performance for Depth Diagnosis of Early Gastric Cancer with Suspected Submucosal Invasion.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic value of mini-probe endoscopic ultrasound in preoperative tumor nodal (TN) staging of gastric cancer and analysis of factors influencing T-staging accuracy.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound in early gastric cancer: Diagnostic accuracy and Tis/T1a lesion over staging risks.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Improved diagnostic accuracy and safety of gel-endoscopic ultrasonography for deep submucosal invasion in early gastric cancer.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Preoperative ultrasound-guided dual localization with titanium clips and carbon nanoparticles for predicting the surgical approach and guiding the resection of Siewert type II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Feasibility of endoscopic ultrasonography using a 60-MHz ultrasound miniature probe in the upper gastrointestinal tract.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2022Article
- Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of gastric dysplasia and early cancer: Current evidence and what the future may hold.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Multidisciplinary team consultation for resectable Gastric Cancer: A propensity score matching analysis.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Value of EUS in determining infiltration depth of early carcinoma and associated precancerous lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.