ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Long- vs short-segment Barrett's esophagus-derived adenocarcinoma: clinical features and outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Optical Endoscopic Evaluation and EUS for Differentiating T1a and T1b Barrett's Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical characteristics of synchronous and metachronous superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma during surveillance after endoscopic submucosal dissection.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
- Sponge cytology combined with endoscopy in patients with long-segment Barrett's esophagus: A retrospective case series and literature review.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe incidence of Barrett's esophageal adenocarcinoma (BEA) is increasing, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been frequently performed for its treatment. However, the differences between the characteristics and ESD outcomes between short- and long-segment BEA (SSBEA and LSBEA, respectively) are unclear. We compared the clinicopathological characteristics and short- and long-term outcomes of ESD between both groups.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 155 superficial BEAs (106 SSBEAs and 49 LSBEAs) treated with ESD in 139 patients and examined their clinicopathological features and ESD outcomes. SSBEA and LSBEA were classified based on whether the maximum length of the background mucosa of BEA was < 3 cm or ≥ 3 cm, respectively.
resultsCompared with SSBEA, LSBEA showed significantly higher proportions of cases with the macroscopically flat type (36.7% vs. 5.7%, p < 0.001), left wall location (38.8% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.001), over half of the tumor circumference (20.4% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001), and synchronous lesions (17.6% vs. 0%, p < 0.001). Compared with SSBEA, regarding ESD outcomes, LSBEA showed significantly longer resection duration (91.0 min vs. 60.5 min, p < 0.001); a lower proportion of submucosal invasion (14.3% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.047), horizontal margin negativity (79.6% vs. 94.3%, p = 0.0089), and R0 resection (69.4% vs. 86.8%, p = 0.024); and a higher proportion of post-procedural stenosis cases (10.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.027). The 5-year cumulative incidence of metachronous cancer in patients without additional treatment was significantly higher for LSBEA than for SSBEA (25.0% vs. 0%, p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe clinicopathological features of LSBEA and SSBEA and their treatment outcomes differed in many aspects. As LSBEAs are difficult to diagnose and treat and show a high risk of metachronous cancer development, careful ESD and follow-up or eradication of the remaining BE may be required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38769185What 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.