ArticleEsophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society2026
Impact of waiting time for treatment on the progression of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to identify an acceptable waiting period between the diagnosis of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).
methodsThis retrospective, single-center study included 423 patients with 514 SESCC lesions. All patients underwent image-enhanced magnifying endoscopy at initial evaluation and on the day of ESD. Following three outcomes were assessed: the diagnostic accuracy of tumor invasion depth on the day of ESD using the Japanese Esophageal Society classification; changes in diagnosis between initial and final evaluations across different waiting intervals; and 5-year survival rates based on intrapapillary capillary loop patterns (B1 vs. B2) and waiting duration.
resultsThe diagnostic accuracy was 96.6% for B1 vessels (EP/LPM), 59.6% for B2 vessels (MM/SM1), and 84.6% for B3 vessels (SM2 or deeper). Among B1 lesions, 100% remained B1 on the day of ESD across all time groups. For B2 lesions, stability was observed in 100% of cases within one month, 98.2% in one to two months, 92.9% in two to three months, and 100% after three months. Five-year survival rates showed no significant differences among waiting period groups in both B1 and B2 categories.
conclusionsA waiting period of 3 months is acceptable for patients with SESCC classified as B1 vessels, provided the diagnostic accuracy is maintained. Thorough endoscopic evaluation supports safe scheduling flexibility without adversely affecting long-term outcomes.
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.