Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39114875›Full record

ReviewGut and liver2024

Optimal Surveillance of Metachronous Gastric Lesion after Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastric Cancer.

Dong Chan Joo, Gwang Ha Kim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Dong Chan JooDepartment of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8734-4938
Gwang Ha KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University School of Medicine and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-9721-5734

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic resection (ER)-a minimal invasive procedure, compared to surgical gastrectomy, with the advantage of preserving the entire stomach and maintaining the patient's quality of life-is a widely used curative treatment for early gastric cancers (EGCs). Despite its advantages, such as the preservation of the whole stomach, a large area of the gastric mucosa with histologic changes such as atrophy and intestinal metaplasia remains after ER, and so does the risk of metachronous gastric cancers (MGCs). Therefore, regular surveillance endoscopy after curative ER of EGCs is important so that MGCs are detected early and so minimally invasive ER remains a treatment option. To date, the optimal interval for surveillance endoscopy after curative ER of EGCs has not been established. Therefore, this review summarizes the results of the published studies on this topic with the aim of establishing the optimal surveillance interval for early identification of MGCs. Based on my review, the median timing of MGC occurrence is within 3 years, and reports suggest biannual endoscopy during the first 3 years; however, the evidence suggests that individual patient characteristics may influence the risk of MGCs. Therefore, stratified endoscopic strategies for surveillance based on patient characteristics, such as age, family history of gastric cancer, synchronous gastric lesions, and corpus intestinal metaplasia, should be applied.

Indexed as

GastroscopyNeoplasms, Second PrimaryStomach NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionGastrectomyGastric MucosaHumansRisk FactorsTime FactorsEndoscopic resectionGastric cancerMetachronous neoplasmsSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID39114875
PMCPMC11391143

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.