Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36268583›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2023

Outcomes of the Conventional versus Pocket-Creation Method for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Gastric Body Tumors Using a Dual Knife: A Retrospective Study.

Sang Pyo Lee, Hyun Joo Jang, Sea Hyub Kae, Jae Gon Lee

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sang Pyo LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4495-3714
Hyun Joo JangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4424-1968
Sea Hyub KaeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3101-1135
Jae Gon LeeDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2930-8159
Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: Various endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) methods for gastric tumors have been tried. However, no studies have yet compared results according to the ESD method for gastric body tumors using a dual knife. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of two ESD methods for gastric body tumors: the pocket-creation method and conventional method. Methods: Patients who underwent ESD for a gastric body tumor were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the ESD method: the conventional method (group I) and pocket-creation method (group II). Characteristics of patients and tumors, hospitalization period, incidence of complications, resection margin status, incidence of surgical operation, procedure time, and laboratory findings were investigated. Results: Of the total of 100 patients, 52 belonged to group I and 48 to group II. All tumors were successfully resected Conclusions: Both methods are suitable for treating gastric body tumors with adequate treatment success rates and comparable complication rates.

Indexed as

Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionStomach NeoplasmsGastric MucosaGastroscopyHumansMargins of ExcisionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeEndoscopic submucosal dissectionEndoscopyPocket-creation methodStomach neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID36268583
PMCPMC10352054
OpenAlexW4306973895

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.