ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Preventive wound drainage reduces esophageal fistula or infection after endoscopic resection of giant submucosal tumors in the esophagus.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Closure strategies post-EMR for esophageal SMTs.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER) has emerged as an innovative approach for the treatment of giant submucosal tumors (SMTs) in the esophagus. However, complications such as esophageal fistula or submucosal infection remain a concern. This article explores how preventive wound drainage can play a significant role in reducing these complications. Patients and methods: We devised an innovative and straightforward method for negative pressure drainage. This approach involves positioning the drainage device with metal clips before closing the esophageal mucosa wound. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 46 patients with giant SMTs who underwent the STER procedure, among whom 28 had drainage and 18 had no drainage. Patient characteristics, adverse events, and risk factors were comprehensively evaluated. Results: In 46 patients, the transverse diameter of the tumor exceeded 5 cm. No significant difference was observed in age, gender, tumor size, surgical scope, or mucosal injury between the two groups studied ( Conclusions: In the context of STER for giant esophageal submucosal tumors with muscular layer full-thickness resection and mucosal injury, preventive drainage is an effective strategy for minimizing postoperative esophageal fistula and submucosal infection complications.
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.