ArticleJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2024
Outcomes and validity of risk stratification tools for endoscopic submucosal dissection of early gastric cancer in Western Australia.
Article in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the treatment of choice for many superficial gastric neoplasms. Clinical outcomes are increasingly comparable between Japanese and Western series; however, data are lacking on the validity of risk stratification tools in Western cohorts. We aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes, explore risk stratification, and compare our data with published Western series. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study in a single tertiary referral center over a 13-year period. Primary outcomes were rates of en bloc, complete (R0) and curative resection. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence, metachronous lesions, eCura grades, and ESGE criteria. A comparative analysis was performed with existing published series from Western centers. Results: Totally 112 patients were included in the study cohort. 50.9% were male, 87.5% Caucasian, and median age was 75.5 years (IQR 14.3 years). Lesions were predominantly antral (36.6%) or body (35.7%); median size 20 mm (IQR 15 mm). Rates of en bloc, R0 resection, and curative resection were 96.4%, 89.3%, and 78.6% (identical between eCura and ESGE), respectively. Adverse events occurred in 5.8%, recurrence in 0%, and metachronous lesions in 9.9%. Our data compared favorably with a review existing Western series, which illustrates increasing adoption of ESD and stable outcomes over time. Conclusion: ESD represents a safe and effective method of treatment for gastric neoplasia in the Western setting. This study highlights the potential for excellent outcomes in a single center with a heterogeneous patient cohort and supports the use of eCura in guiding post procedural management.
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.