Observational studyClinical and translational gastroenterology2020
Repeated Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Esophageal Neoplasia Located Close to a Previous Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Scar.
Observational study in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Community standard practices in the endoscopic treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a nationwide survey in Japan.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2026Article
- Repeat endoscopic submucosal dissection of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma near a previous scar by water pressure method.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Risk stratification for stricture formation after endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal dysplasia.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2025Article
- Successful perforation management during esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection using the stent-anchoring method: A case report.DEN open · 2025Article
- Repeat endoscopic submucosal dissection close to the initial endoscopic submucosal dissection scar for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2024Article
- Predictors of technical difficulty for trainees in esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2024Article
- Direct Mucosal-Side Fibrosis Cutting for Salvage Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Secondary Barrett's Neoplasia Adjacent Multiband Resection Scars.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Salvage Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Local Recurrence of Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer after Photodynamic Therapy.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) could become a standard treatment for early stage esophageal neoplasia. Recurrence sometimes develops close to a previous ESD scar. These lesions are predictably difficult to treat with ESD because of severe fibrosis. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of ESD for esophageal neoplasia located close to a previous ESD scar.
methodsThis was a retrospective observational study in a single institution. A total of 549 consecutive patients with 927 esophageal lesions were treated with ESD. The primary outcomes were resectability and adverse events of esophageal neoplasia located close to previous ESD scars (ESD scar group) than in primary esophageal ESD (primary group). Furthermore, predictive factors of perforation were examined.
resultsA total of 545 primary and 29 ESD scars in consecutive patients were evaluated. En bloc and complete (R0) resection rates in the ESD scar group were lower than those in the primary group (79.3% vs 98.3%, P < 0.01 and 75.9% vs 93.4%, P < 0.01). Perforations occurred more frequently in the ESD scar group (10.3% vs 2.0%, P = 0.03). The ESD scar group was a predictive factor for perforation (odds ratio = 10.37, 95% confidence interval: 2.15-49.94, P = 0.004). There were similar results for inverse probability of treatment weighting methods (odds ratio = 6.78, 95% confidence interval: 1.40-32.98, P = 0.018). DISCUSSION: ESD for esophageal neoplasia located close to a previous ESD scar was difficult to completely resect and increased the likelihood of perforation but could be a treatment option.
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.