ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Efficacy and safety of pocket-creation method for early gastric cancers.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pocket-creation method versus conventional method of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Saudi medical journal · 2025Pooled it
- Bridge technique self-traction improves outcomes over conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for semicircumferential gastric cardia neoplasms in a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- A Purse-String Traction Technique Using Nylon Loop and Clips for Curative Endoscopic En Bloc Resection of Large Early Gastric Cancer.ACG case reports journal · 2026Article
- Comparison of Traction and Pocket Creation Methods for Facilitating Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Nasogastric-tube decompression facilitates the pocket-creation method of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.Endoscopy · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard endoscopic treatment for early gastric cancers (EGCs). However, obscured view and difficulty in submucosal lifting during ESD have been demonstrated. Additionally, ESD is time-consuming and poses a high risk of perforation and bleeding when performed in challenging locations. The pocket-creation method (PCM) is a newly developed strategy for colorectal tumors, while the outcomes of application in the treatment of EGCs are rarely reported. In the present study, we aimed to compare the technical efficacy and safety of PCM-ESD and the conventional ESD (c-ESD) technique for the treatment of EGCs.
methodsThis was a single-center retrospective study consisting of 162 patients with EGCs who underwent ESD between February 2019 and February 2021. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. In addition, clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were also compared.
resultsPCM-ESD was more likely to be used in patients with larger lesions than c-ESD with/without traction. In addition, the resection speed for lesions of the PCM-ESD was faster compared with c-ESD without traction (median dissection speed: 19.6 mm
conclusionsCollectively, PCM-ESD appeared to be a safer and more effective treatment for EGCs than c-ESD. In addition, PCM-ESD could significantly improve the speed of tumor resection.
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.