ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2020
Retrospective Comparison of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Versus Laparoscopic or Surgical Resection of Small (≤ 5 cm) Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04751591 (Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Clinical Trial For Comparison Of Safety Between Endoscopic Resection And Laparoscopic Partial Gastrectomy In Patients With 2-5cm Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Clinical Trial For Comparison Of Safety Between Endoscopic Resection And Laparoscopic Partial Gastrectomy In Patients With 2-5cm Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Subepithelial Lesion Observed in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Guideline
- Comparison Among Endoscopic, Laparoscopic, and Open Resection for Relatively Small Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (<5 cm): A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- A novel mucosal zipper endoscopic resection technique versus endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric submucosal tumors: a retrospective comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Comprehensive evaluation of the learning curve for submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- EndoscopicWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison Between the Efficacy of EFR and CASL in the Treatment of Small Gastric Stromal Tumors: A Retrospective Study.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic submucosal excavation for a small rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumor with serosal layer preservation: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection for the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Preset pursestring procedure: Innovative auxiliary method of endoscopic full-thickness resection in small gastric stromal tumors.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Endoscopic therapy versus surgical resection for rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a population-based comparative analysis of long-term survival outcomes.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Advances in endoscopic closure techniques for endoscopic full-thickness resection.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Subepithelial Lesions Observed in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- Endoscopic full-thickness resectionWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Advancements in Endoscopic Treatment for Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.Gut and liver · 2025Review
- Endoscopic semi-blunt dissection technique is safe and effective for treating gastric submucosal tumors from the muscularis propria.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Comparable long‑term survival outcomes of endoscopic treatment versus surgical treatment for gastrointestinal stromal tumors with a diameter of 5-10 cm.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Robotic Platforms for Therapeutic Flexible Endoscopy: A Literature Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Twin-grasper assisted mucosal inverted closure achieves complete healing of large perforations after gastric endoscopic full-thickness resection.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2023Article
- Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: Our Ten-Year Experience of a Single-Center Tertiary Hospital.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a preoperative difficulty scoring system for endoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a multi-center study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIM AND
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety between endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFR) and laparoscopic or surgical resection methods for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in size of 5.0 cm or less. Gastric GISTs are common, and resection is the most effective treatment.
methodWe retrospectively reviewed 216 resections of gastric GISTs in size of up to 5.0 cm at our center from 2009 to 2017.Eligible resection cases were divided into EFR (n = 85), laparoscopic(n = 64), and surgical (n = 67) groups. The clinical records, patient demographic, symptoms, perioperative data, pathological findings, and long-term follow-up outcomes were collected and compared statistically.
resultsNo tumor rupture or recurrence occurred in the three groups. The prevalence of complications was significantly lower in EFR (5.9%) than both laparoscopic (7.8%) and surgical group (16.4%) (P < 0.01). In EFR group, the R0 resection rate (95.3%) was significantly lower than in the laparoscopic group and surgical group (100%) (P < 0.001). The hospital cost (OR = 62.79, CI: 12.954-304.363, P < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the EFR than in the laparoscopic group. The hospital cost (OR = 39.032, CI: 8.045-189.371, P < 0.0001) and post-operative diet time (OR = 2.779, CI: 1.225-6.304, P < 0.05) were also significantly lower in the EFR than in the surgical group.
conclusionEFR was a feasible treatment for gastric GISTs of size of ≤ 5.0 cm with an acceptable complete resection rate. In addition, EFR had significantly fewer postoperative complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and lower cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31823317What 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.