ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Clinical outcomes of endoscopic resection for the treatment of esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a ten-year experience from a large tertiary center in China.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility and safety of endoscopic full-thickness resection of large gastric subepithelial lesions outside the operating room: 10 years of experience in a large tertiary hospital in China.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Is endoscopic treatment a useful therapeutic option for esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors?World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Endoscopic resection for esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: Balancing R0 resection and long-term outcomes.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Endoscopic versus laparoscopic resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors at the esophagogastric junction using propensity score matching analysis.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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundsEsophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (E-GISTs) are extremely rare and surgical resection is the recommended approach. However, surgical resection usually causes severe trauma that may result in significant postoperative morbidity. Endoscopic resection (ER) has developed rapidly in recent years and has been widely used in gastrointestinal lesions. Nevertheless, the feasibility and efficacy of ER in the management of E-GISTs are unknown.
methodsRetrospective data were collected from January 2011 to December 2020 in a large tertiary center of China. Twenty-eight patients with E-GISTs treated by ER were included in the study.
resultsOf the 28 patients, there were 21 males and 7 females, with a median age of 55 years (40-70 years). The median tumor size was 15 mm (5-80 mm). The technical success rate was 100% (28/28), while the en bloc resection rate was 96.4% (27/28). The median operation time was 35 min (10-410 min). Sixteen (57.2%) tumors were categorized into very low risk group, six (21.4%) into low risk group, and six (21.4%) into high risk group. Pathologists carefully examined margins of each lesion. There were 11 lesions (39.3%) determined as R0 resection and 17 lesions (60.7%) as R1 resection with positive margins. The median hospital stay was 2 days (range, 1-8 days). One patient suffered from hydrothorax and required drainage, leading to a major adverse event rate of 3.6% (1/28). There was no conversion to surgery, and no death occurred within 30 days after the procedure. Imatinib was given to two patients after ER under multidisciplinary team surveillance. During follow-up (median of 54 months, 9-122 months), no recurrences or metastasis were observed.
conclusionER is safe and effective for E-GISTs and might become an optional choice in the future. Multicenter, prospective, large samples with long-term follow-up studies are still needed.
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.