ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2021
Retrospective analysis of the clinical effects of endoscopic mucosal dissection on treatment of early esophagogastric precancerous lesions.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2021. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The application effect of rubber band traction assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal precancerous lesions.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Short-term efficacy of additional laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Nomogram for preoperative estimation of histologic grade in gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe purpose of this study was to conduct a retrospective study about the clinical effects of endoscopic mucosal dissection on the treatment of early esophagogastric precancerous lesions.
methodsA total of 132 patients with early esophagogastric precancerous lesions who were diagnosed and treated with concurrent surgery in our hospital from January 2018 to December 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) group (n = 58) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) group (n = 74) according to different surgical methods. The data in the two groups were compared and analyzed in terms of surgical indicators, treatment status and incidence of postoperative complications.
resultsThere were statistically significant differences between the two groups in the whole block cutting rate, fractional cutting rate and complete cutting rate (P < 0.05). The mean operation time of ESD group was significantly longer than that of EMR group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the intraoperative bleeding rate, blood loss, average specimen area, length of hospital stay and treatment cost between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incidence and recurrence of postoperative complications, including bleeding, perforation and stenosis in the two groups, were observed within 1 year of postoperative follow-up. The incidence of complications in ESD group was slightly higher than that in EMR group, and the local recurrence rate in ESD group was lower than that in EMR group (P > 0.05).
conclusionESD is an alternative surgical treatment for patients with early esophagogastric precancerous 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.