Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38753528›Full record

Trial reportUnited European gastroenterology journal2024

Optical enhancement mode 2 improves the detection rate of gastric neoplastic lesion in high-risk populations: A multicenter randomized controlled clinical study.

Wei An, Qi Wu, Xiao-Ju Su, Hong-Xin Sun, Jing Wang, Wei-Jia Dou, Zhen-Xiong Liu, Gai-Fang Liu, Yue-Han Zhang, Shu-Chang Xu and 19 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in United European gastroenterology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Shedding a new light on gastric cancer screening.United European gastroenterology journal · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors.

Wei AnDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Qi WuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Peking University Cancer Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xiao-Ju SuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Hong-Xin SunDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jing WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Peking University Cancer Hospital, Beijing, China.
Wei-Jia DouDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tangdu Hospital the Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Zhen-Xiong LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tangdu Hospital the Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Gai-Fang LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Yue-Han ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, China.
Shu-Chang XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3170-2278
Ying ChenDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Hao ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Bin ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Ping LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hainan Cancer Hospital, Haikou, China.
Si-Yu SunDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Sheng WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Wen LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Xiao-Feng ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.
Yu-Shu ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Nanjing Medical University Affiliated Nanjing Hospital, Nanjing, China.
Yi-Jun XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Nanjing Medical University Affiliated Nanjing Hospital, Nanjing, China.
Mei LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tongji Hospital Tongji Medical College of HUST, Shanghai, China.
Xin-Xia FengDepartment of Gastroenterology, Tongji Hospital Tongji Medical College of HUST, Shanghai, China.
Xiu-Li ZuoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9556-8771
Guang-Chao LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Li-Dong XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Zhengzhou Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Dong WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Ruijin Hospital, Medical College, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Xin-Gang ShiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3912-2019
Liang-Hao HuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7535-7475
Zhao-Shen LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

Pentax Corporation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDetection of early neoplastic lesions is crucial for improving the survival rates of patients with gastric cancer. Optical enhancement mode 2 is a new image-enhanced endoscopic technique that offers bright images and can improve the visibility of neoplastic lesions. This study aimed to compare the detection of neoplastic lesions with optical enhancement mode 2 and white-light imaging (WLI) in a high-risk population.

methodsIn this prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients were randomly assigned to optical enhancement mode 2 or WLI groups. Detection of suspicious neoplastic lesions during the examinations was recorded, and pathological diagnoses served as the gold standard.

resultsA total of 1211 and 1219 individuals were included in the optical enhancement mode 2 and WLI groups, respectively. The detection rate of neoplastic lesions was significantly higher in the optical enhancement mode 2 group (5.1% vs. 1.9%; risk ratio, 2.656 [95% confidence interval, 1.630-4.330]; p < 0.001). The detection rate of neoplastic lesions with an atrophic gastritis background was significantly higher in the optical enhancement mode 2 group (8.6% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001). The optical enhancement mode 2 group also had a higher detection rate among endoscopists with different experiences.

conclusionsOptical enhancement mode 2 was more effective than WLI for detecting neoplastic lesions in the stomach, and can serve as a new method for screening early gastric cancer in clinical practice. CLINICAL REGISTRY: United States National Library of Medicine (https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov), ID: NCT040720521.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerGastroscopyImage EnhancementStomach NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleGastritis, AtrophicHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studiesearly gastric cancerendoscopic screening

Identifiers

PMID38753528
PMCPMC11250407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.