SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgery in the Treatment of Early Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer (2023).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Guideline
- Risk factors for metachronous esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after endoscopic or surgical resection of esophageal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Early Gastric Cancer Outcomes and Treatment Disparity: a SEER analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Article
- Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and surgery for early signet-ring cell carcinoma of the stomach: a multicenter study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- The Impact of Institutional Volume of Endoscopic Resection on Early-Stage Gastric Cancer Outcomes.Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- A Liquid Biopsy Assay of Exosomal miRNA for Non-invasive Identification of Lymph Node Metastasis in Early Gastric Cancer.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Non-Curative Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Current Concepts, Pitfalls and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Risk of tuberculosis after endoscopic resection and gastrectomy in gastric cancer: nationwide population-based matched cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Treatment of Early-Stage Cancer or Precancerous Lesion in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Early Gastric Cancer: Update on Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Is Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Entering Into a New Era?Journal of digestive diseasesArticle
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred approach to treat early gastric cancer (EGC) in patients without suspected lymph node involvement and that meet the criteria for ER. Surgery is a more aggressive treatment, but it may be associated with less recurrence and the need for reintervention. Previous meta-analyses comparing ER with surgery for EGC did not incorporate the most recent studies, making accurate conclusions not possible. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine complete resection, length of hospital stay (LOHS), adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, recurrence, 5-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with EGC. Results: A total of 29 cohorts studies involving 20559 patients were included. The ER (n = 7709) group was associated with a lower incidence of AEs (RD = -0.07, 95%CI = -0.1, -0.04, p < 0.0001) and shorter LOHS (95% CI -5.89, -5.32; p < 0,00001) compared to surgery (n = 12850). However, ER was associated with lower complete resection rates (RD = -0.1, 95%CI = -0.15, -0.06; p < 0.00001) and higher rates of recurrence (RD = 0.07, 95%CI = 0.06; p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences between surgery and ER in 5-year OS (RD = -0.01, 95%CI = -0.04, 0.02; p = 0.38), 5-year CSS (RD = 0.01, 95%CI = 0.00, 0.02; p < 0.17), and incidence of serious AEs (RD = -0.03, 95%CI = -0.08, 0.01; p = 0.13). Conclusions: ER and surgery are safe and effective treatments for EGC. ER provides lower rates of AEs and shorter LOHS compared to surgery. Although ER is associated with lower complete resection rates and a higher risk of recurrence, the OS and CSS were similar between both approaches. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42021255328.
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.