Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35849242›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Comparison between endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial neoplasia at esophagogastric junction: a case-matched controlled study of a single center from China.

Bo-Zong Shao, Ning-Li Chai, Long-Song Li, Sha-Sha Wang, Xiu-Xue Feng, Nan-Jun Wang, Zan-Tao Wang, Sheng-Zhen Liu, En-Qiang Linghu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bo-Zong Shao *Department of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Ning-Li Chai *Department of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Long-Song LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Sha-Sha WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Xiu-Xue FengDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Nan-Jun WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Zan-Tao WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
Sheng-Zhen LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China.
En-Qiang LinghuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100853, China. linghuenqiang@vip.sina.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4506-7877
Chinese PLA General Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSo far, little evidence is available for the comprehensive comparison of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for the treatment of superficial neoplasia at esophagogastric junction (EGJ).

methodsEGJ superficial neoplasia patients with ESTD treatment between January, 2021 and August, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed and individually matched at 1:1 ratio with those with ESD treatment according to lesion size, specimen area and lesion location, forming ESTD and ESD group, respectively. A sample size of 17 patients was collected for each group. Treatment outcomes including resection time, specimen area, and resection speed as well as occurrence of complications were evaluated.

resultsCompared with ESD group, ESTD group got shorter resection time (111.00 ± 11.70 min for ESD group vs. 71.59 ± 6.18 min for ESTD group, p = 0.008) and faster section speed (0.23 ± 0.03 cm

conclusionFor the treatment of EGJ superficial neoplasia, ESTD is a safer and more effective and reliable endoscopic technique compared with ESD.

Indexed as

Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagogastric JunctionHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCarcinomaEndoscopic submucosal dissectionEndoscopic submucosal tunnel dissectionEsophagogastric junctionSuperficial neoplasia

Identifiers

PMID35849242
OpenAlexW4285801710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.