Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33224272›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2020

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and comparison to surgery for superficial esophageal squamous cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jen-Hao Yeh, Ru-Yi Huang, Ching-Tai Lee, Chih-Wen Lin, Ming-Hung Hsu, Tsung-Chin Wu, Po-Jen Hsiao, Wen-Lun Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of a tumor in the upper esophageal sphincter and piriform sinus.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Endoscopic submucosal dissectionTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Jen-Hao YehDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, E-DA Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Ru-Yi HuangSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Ching-Tai LeeDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, E-DA Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Chih-Wen LinDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, E-DA Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Ming-Hung HsuDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, E-DA Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Tsung-Chin WuDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, E-DA Dachang Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Po-Jen HsiaoDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, E-DA Dachang Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Wen-Lun WangSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4623-4385
E-Da Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial esophageal squamous cancer.

methodsA literature search was conducted using PubMed, ProQuest and Cochrane Library databases. Primary outcomes were overall survival, disease-specific survival and recurrence-free survival at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence and metastasis. Hazard ratios were calculated based on time to events for survival analysis, and odds radios were used to compare discrete variables.

resultsA total of 3796 patients in 21 retrospective studies, including 5 comparative studies for ESD and esophagectomy were enrolled. The invasion depth was 52.0% for M1-M2, 43.2% for M3-SM1 and 4.7% for SM2 or deeper. The 5-year survival rate was: overall survival 87.3%, disease-specific survival 97.7%, and recurrence-free survival 85.1%, respectively. Pooled local recurrence of ESD was 1.8% and metastasis was 3.3%. In terms of the comparison between ESD and esophagectomy, there was no difference in the overall survival (86.4%

conclusionsFor superficial esophageal squamous cancer, ESD may be considered as the primary treatment of for mucosal lesions, and additional treatment should be available for submucosal invasive cancers.

Indexed as

Endoscopic submucosal dissectionEsophageal squamous cell cancerEsophagectomyMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID33224272
PMCPMC7656883
OpenAlexW3096805752

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.