ArticleGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2023
Risk factors of perforation in gastric stromal tumors during endoscopic resection: a retrospective case-control study.
Article in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- An interpretable machine learning model integrating [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- A novel risk-scoring system based on endoscopic ultrasound and clinical characteristics for the preoperative diagnosis of small gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Dental-floss traction-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection of a gastrointestinal exophytic tumor: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
- Endoscopic resection for gastric subepithelial tumours: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Postoperative perforation risk after endoscopic removal of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors: Development and validation of a predictive nomogram.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Development and validation of an intraoperative perforation prediction scoring system for endoscopic resection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Efficacy analysis of modified double band ligation-assisted endoscopic submucosal resection and endoscopic mucosal dissection in the treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (≤ 1.5 cm).Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- A new endoscopic treatment for gastric fundal subepithelial lesions using loop-assisted inversion and double suture technique.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPerforation is a common complication during endoscopic resection (ER) of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (gGISTs) associated with secondary infections, sepsis, hospitalization time and cost. However, the risk factors of perforation remain controversial. This study aimed to investigate the risk factors for perforation during ER of gGISTs.
methodsThis retrospective case-control study included consecutive patients with gGISTs who underwent ER between June 2009 and November 2021 at the Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the risk factors for perforation. Sensitivity analyses with propensity scoring (PS) were performed to evaluate the stability of the independent effects.
resultsIn total, 422 patients with gGISTs were included. The following factors were associated with perforation during ER: in the non-intraluminal growth patterns (all confounders adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 5.39, 95% CI 2.99-9.72, P < 0.001), in the gastric fundus (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.40-3.60, P = 0.007), sized ≥ 2 cm (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.04-2.77, P = 0.035), in the lesser curvature (aOR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05-0.27, P < 0.001), and in the gastric cardia (aOR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.50, P = 0.003). The PS analysis confirmed the stable independent effects of these identified risk factors.
conclusionsERs of gGISTs in non-intraluminal growth patterns, in the gastric fundus, and with larger tumor size were independent risk factors for perforation. While tumors in the lesser curvature or gastric cardia were independent protective factor for perforation.
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.