SynthesisSaudi medical journal2025
Pocket-creation method versus conventional method of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Saudi medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Traction Techniques for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD): Organ-Specific Best Practices and Western Outcomes.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- Is Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Entering Into a New Era?Journal of digestive diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety between 2 endoscopic surgical approaches for early gastric cancer: pocket creation method of endoscopic submucosal dissection (PCM-ESD) and conventional ESD (CM-ESD).
methodsA comprehensive literature search was carried out in PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Cochrane Library from their inception to July 2024 using medical subject headings and free-text terms, which were "pocket-creation method", "gastric cancer", "gastric neoplasms", and "endoscopic submucosal dissection" or "ESD". Two independent reviewers carried out the search, screened studies, and extracted data.
resultsA total of 578 cases were included in our study, which sourced from 2 randomized controlled trials and 5 retrospective cohort studies. Among them, 258 cases were in the intervention group that received PCM-ESD, and 320 cases were in the control group that received CM-ESD. The PCM-ESD demonstrated a significantly faster dissection speed (mean difference=5.57 mm²/min; 95% confidence interval: [4.24-6.91];
conclusionFor endoscopists, the use of PCM in early gastric cancer seems to be superior to CM-ESD in terms of dissection speed and the procedure time, and got a lower incidence of perforation. Moreover, there was no discernible difference between the 2 groups' rates of en bloc and R0 resection, and the use of PCM-ESD did not increase the chance of delayed bleeding.
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.