Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37161697›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2024

Delayed Perforation Occurring after Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Clinical Features and Management Strategy.

Tae-Se Kim, Byung-Hoon Min, Yang Won Min, Hyuk Lee, Poong-Lyul Rhee, Jae J Kim, Jun Haeng Lee

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Comparison Between the Efficacy of EFR and CASL in the Treatment of Small Gastric Stromal Tumors: A Retrospective Study.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tae-Se KimDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3950-4516
Byung-Hoon MinDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8048-361X
Yang Won MinDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-7471-1305
Hyuk LeeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4271-7205
Poong-Lyul RheeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0495-5296
Jae J KimDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-0226-1330
Jun Haeng LeeDepartment of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5272-1841
Samsung Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: Delayed perforation is a rare but serious adverse event of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical features and appropriate management strategy of patients with delayed perforation. Methods: Among 11,531 patients who underwent gastric ESD, the clinical features and outcomes of patients who experienced delayed perforation were retrospectively reviewed and compared with those of the control group. Results: Delayed perforation occurred in 15 of 11,531 patients (0.13%). The patients with delayed perforation were significantly older than those without delayed perforation (p=0.027). The median time to diagnosis of delayed perforation was 28.8 hours (range, 14 to 71 hours). All 15 patients with delayed perforation complained of severe abdominal pain after gastric ESD and underwent subsequent chest X-rays (CXRs) for evaluation. In subsequent CXR, free air was found in 12 patients (80%). For three (20%) patients without free air in CXR, delayed perforation was finally diagnosed by computed tomography. Leukocytosis was significantly less frequent in the patients without free air in CXR (p=0.022). A perforation hole smaller than 1 cm in size was more frequently observed in the six patients who underwent successful non-surgical treatments than in the nine patients who underwent surgery (p<0.001). There was no mortality related to delayed perforation. Conclusions: One-fifth of the patients with delayed perforation did not show free air in CXR and exhibited less leukocytosis than those with free air. Non-surgical treatments including endoscopic closure might be considered as an initial treatment modality for delayed perforation smaller than 1 cm.

Indexed as

Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionStomach NeoplasmsHumansLeukocytosisRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeEndoscopic mucosal resectionIntestinal perforationPostoperative complicationsStomach neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID37161697
PMCPMC10791500
OpenAlexW4376115549

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.