ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Comparative analysis of differences between preoperative endoscopic biopsy and postoperative pathological examination for diagnosis of gastric intraepithelial neoplasia.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Establishment and Validation of a Pathologic Upgrade Prediction Nomogram Model for Gastric Low-Grade Intraepithelial Neoplasia Patients After the Eradication ofCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterTrial
- Label-free quantitative proteomics of gastric high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Article
- Risk factors analysis for pathological upgrade after endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients with gastric intraepithelial neoplasia: a single-center retrospective study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Machine learning: A non-invasive prediction method for gastric cancer based on a survey of lifestyle behaviors.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study was performed to compare the differences between preoperative endoscopic biopsy (PEB) and postoperative pathological examination (PPE) for diagnosis of gastric intraepithelial neoplasia (GIN).
methodsFrom September 2016 to July 2019, 188 consecutive patients with GIN at Yuyao People's Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The 188 patients had 218 GIN lesions. All patients underwent PEB and either endoscopic submucosal dissection or surgical treatment. PPE was performed on pathological tissues that had been surgically removed.
resultsAmong 138 cases of low-grade dysplasia (LGD) diagnosed by PEB, 46 were upgraded to high-grade dysplasia (HGD), 20 were upgraded to early gastric cancer (EGC), and 2 were downgraded to inflammation after PPE. Among 42 cases of HGD, 23 were upgraded to EGC, 2 were downgraded to LGD, and 2 were downgraded to inflammation after PPE. Among 38 cases of EGC, 1 was downgraded to HGD and 2 were downgraded to LGD after PPE. The original diagnosis was maintained after the operation in 120 cases of GIN.
conclusionBiopsy did not fully reflect the lesions of GIN. Biopsy review should be actively performed, and the lesions should be clarified by endoscopic submucosal dissection or surgery.
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.