ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Comparison of endoscopic full-thickness resection and ligation-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection for small (≤ 1.5 cm) gastric subepithelial tumors originating from muscularis propria.
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.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of ligation-assisted versus snare traction-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection for small (≤ 1.5 cm) gastric submucosal tumors originating from the muscularis propria: a propensity score-matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection of upper gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a retrospective study from a large tertiary hospital in China.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection for the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Endoscopic full-thickness resectionWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Present situation of minimally invasive surgical treatment for early gastric cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Review
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
backgroundIn the treatment of small gastric subepithelial tumors originating from muscularis propria (SET-MPs), endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has been an effective procedure and ligation-assisted EFTR (EFTR-L) seems a feasible and promising operation. We aimed to compare the therapeutic outcomes of EFTR-L and EFTR to evaluate effect and safety of either method in the treatment of small (≤ 1.5 cm) gastric SET-MPs.
methodsBetween January 2018 to May 2022, we retrospectively enrolled a total of 119 patients with gastric SET-MPs treated by EFTR-L (79 patients) or EFTR (40 patients) at Xiangya Hospital Central South University. Clinical characteristics, operation efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and operation cost were compared between the 2 groups. Univariate and multiple logistic and linear regressions were applied to analyze the therapeutic outcomes of the procedure, and covariates were adjusted in the multiple analysis.
resultsThe operation time of EFTR-L group (16.34 ± 5.75 min) was significantly shorter than EFTR group (51.23 ± 21.21 min, P < 0.001), and the difference remained significant after adjusting the covariates (adjusted mean difference, 30.56; 95% confidence interval, 25.65-35.47; P < 0.001). The operation cost of EFTR-L group was lower than EFTR group (1268.52 ± 457.22 vs 1643.18 ± 295.08 $; P < 0.001). The complete resection rate of the EFTR-L group was 98.72% and of the EFTR group 100%. The incidence of abdominal pain in the EFTR-L group (5.06%) was lower than in the EFTR group (27.50%, P = 0.008). A patient in the EFTR group underwent severe pneumoperitoneum and received abdominocentesis during operation. One case of peritonitis occurred in the EFTR-L group but recovered from intensified antibiotic therapy. No delayed blood or perforation occurred.
conclusionsCompared to EFTR, EFTR-L might be a feasible procedure for small (≤ 1.5 cm) gastric SET-MPs due to the acceptable efficacy, shorter operation time, and lower cost.
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.