ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2022
Prognosis of patients with early gastric carcinoma treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection and risk factors for additional postoperative surgery.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection on postoperative wound complications in patients with gastric cancer: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and prognosis analysis of pulley traction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection with dental floss for early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the prognosis of patients with early gastric carcinoma (EGC) treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and the risk factors for additional postoperative surgery.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed on 100 patients with EGC admitted to our hospital from January 2017 to May 2019. According to different surgical methods, patients were divided into the ESD (n=60) and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) groups (n=40). Clinical efficacy, perioperative indexes, incidence of complications and risk factors for additional postoperative surgery were compared.
resultsThe ESD group had evidently prolonged operation time (P<0.01) but similar intraoperative blood loss (P>0.05) as compared with the EMR group. In comparison to the EMR group, the gastrointestinal recovery time and length of stay in the ESD group were notably shorter (P<0.01), the rates of en bloc resection and complete resection of lesions were markedly higher (P<0.05), and the postoperative fever/infection rate was noticeably lower (P<0.05). The two surgical methods had no significant difference on the overall survival rate of patients (P=0.302). It was identified that the infiltration depth and the positive surgical margin were independent risk factors for postoperative additional surgery (all P<0.05). ROC analysis revealed that positive surgical margin was quite valuable in judging the need for additional postoperative surgery.
conclusionESD can accelerate the postoperative recovery of patients with EGC, and positive surgical margin is independently tied to additional postoperative surgery in patients after ESD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35702094PMC9185062W4285741689What 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.