ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2022
Study on the Effect of Different Endoscopic Auxiliary Treatment of Gastric Mucosal Microtumor.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the effect of endoscopy in the treatment of gastric mucosal microtumors. Methods: A total of 229 patients with gastric mucosal microtumors were treated in our hospital from January 2016 to December 2021. All patients were divided into three groups group A, group B, and group C. Group A was treated with a transparent cap combined with circle-assisted endoscopic resection, group B with ligator combined with circle-assisted endoscopic resection, and group C with endoscopic mucosal tumor resection. The effects of the three groups were observed. Results: There were 47 patients in group A, 17 males, and 30 females, aged 36-69 years, with an average age of 55.6 ± 9.2 years. There were 54 patients in group B, 18 males, and 36 females, aged 38-72 years, with an average age of 57.6 ± 7.7 years. There were 128 patients in group C, 29 males, and 99 females, aged 33-78 years, with an average age of 55.6 ± 8.4 years. There is no significant difference in age and sex between group A, group B, and group C ( Conclusion: Endoscopic mucosal resection and ligation combined with circle-assisted endoscopic resection are effective and safe in the treatment of gastric mucosal microtumors, but it needs to be combined with targeted nursing measures. The transparent cap combined with ring-assisted endoscopic resection has a significant effect on the treatment of gastric mucosal micromasses, reducing operative complications.
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.