ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Gastric xanthelasma is a warning sign for
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contradictory evidence suggested gastric xanthelasma (GX) was associated with some upper gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. Additionally, no research has been performed on the relationship between esophageal/duodenal xanthelasma and upper GI diseases. Methods: Individuals who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy at Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, participated in this retrospective study. This study evaluated whether the risk of GX or esophageal/duodenal xanthelasma was influenced by the following gastroesophageal diseases: superficial gastritis, gastric polyp, bile reflux, peptic ulcer, reflux esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, esophageal cancer, atrophic gastritis (AG), intestinal metaplasia (IM), dysplasia, gastric cancer, and Results: Of the 69,071 subjects reviewed, 1,220 (1.77%) had GX, and 54 (0.08%) had esophageal/duodenal xanthelasma. There was no difference in the prevalence of upper GI diseases between patients with and without esophageal/duodenal xanthelasma. Nevertheless, compared with non-xanthelasma patients, GX patients had a greater proportion of AG, IM, dysplasia, gastric cancer, and Conclusion: Esophageal/duodenal xanthelasma may not be associated with upper GI diseases, and further research is needed to support this hypothesis. Notably, GX, especially multiple GXs, may be a more easily detected warning sign of AG, IM, or
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.