ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2021
Accuracy of the endoscopic evaluation of esophageal involvement in esophagogastric junction cancer.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical practice guidelines for esophagogastric junction cancer: Upper GI Oncology Summit 2023.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024Guideline
- Prognostic significance and risk factors of mediastinal lymph node metastasis in esophagogastric junction cancer: a single-center, retrospective study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- A case report of metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma during pregnancy.SAGE open medical case reports · 2024Article
- Tumor immune microenvironment in therapy-naive esophageal adenocarcinoma could predict the nodal status.Cancer medicine · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophageal involvement length (EIL) is a promising indicator of metastasis or recurrence in mediastinal lymph nodes (MLNs) in adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ). This study aimed to elucidate the accuracy of the preoperative endoscopic evaluations of EIL and its clinical significance in this disease. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn total, 75 patients with Siewert type II (N = 53) or III (N = 22) adenocarcinoma of the EGJ, who underwent surgical resection without preoperative therapy between 1995 and 2016 were enrolled. We retrospectively examined the accuracy of the preoperative endoscopic evaluations of EIL (preoperative EIL), compared to the pathologically evaluated EIL. Finally, we investigated the association between preoperative EIL and metastasis or recurrence in MLNs.
resultsThe accuracy of the preoperative EIL within a 1-cm interval was only 53.3%. Among patients with discordance between the pre- and postoperative evaluations, 68.6 % had the underestimation in the preoperative EIL. pN1-3 (OR = 5.85, 95% CI: 1.03-33.17) and undifferentiated histologic type (OR = 2.52, 95% CI: 0.89-7.14) were potential risk factors for the discordance. Regarding metastasis or recurrence in MLNs, preoperative EIL of 2-3 cm (OR = 10.41, 95% CI: 1.35-80.11) and >3 cm (OR = 8.33, 95% CI: 1.09-63.96) were independent predictors.
conclusionAlthough the accuracy of the endoscopic evaluations of EIL is insufficient with many underestimations, EIL should be assessed in preoperative staging because of significant predictive power for metastasis or recurrence in MLNs.
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.