Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35116099›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2022

Feasibility of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection in elderly patients aged ≥ 80 years.

Yasuhiro Inokuchi, Ayaka Ishida, Kei Hayashi, Yoshihiro Kaneta, Hayato Watanabe, Kazuki Kano, Mitsuhiro Furuta, Kosuke Takahashi, Hirohito Fujikawa, Takanobu Yamada and 5 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Prevention of Gastric Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yasuhiro InokuchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan. inokuchiy@kcch.jp.
Ayaka IshidaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kei HayashiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yoshihiro KanetaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Hayato WatanabeDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kazuki KanoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Mitsuhiro FurutaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kosuke TakahashiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Hirohito FujikawaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Takanobu YamadaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kouji YamamotoDepartment of Biostatics, Yokohama City University School of Medicine., Yokohama 236-0004, Kanagawa, Japan.
Nozomu MachidaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Takashi OgataDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Takashi OshimaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Kanagawa Cancer Center, Yokohama 241-8515, Kanagawa, Japan.
Shin MaedaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University, Yokohama 236-0004, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kanagawa Cancer CenterKanagawa Prefectural Hospital Organization · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndoscopic resection, especially endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), is increasingly performed in elderly patients with early gastric cancer, and lesions beyond the expanded indications are also resected endoscopically in some patients. It is essential to assess whether gastric ESD is safe and suitable for elderly patients and investigate what type of lesions carry an increased risk of ESD-related complications.

aimTo assess the efficacy and feasibility of gastric ESD for elderly patients, and define high-risk lesions and prognostic indicators.

methodsAmong a total of 1169 sessions of gastric ESD performed in Kanagawa Cancer Center Hospital from 2006 to 2014, 179 sessions (15.3%) were performed in patients aged ≥ 80 years, and 172 of these sessions were done in patients with a final diagnosis of gastric cancer. These patients were studied retrospectively to evaluate short-term outcomes and survival. The short-term outcomes included the rates of

resultsThe

conclusionGastric ESD is feasible even in patients aged ≥ 80 years. Observation without additional surgery after noncurative ESD is reasonable, especially in elderly patients with CCI ≥ 2.

Indexed as

Charlson comorbidity indexComplicationsEarly gastric cancerElderlyEndoscopic submucosal dissectionPrognostic indicators

Identifiers

PMID35116099
PMCPMC8788168
OpenAlexW4206332271

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.