Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40982404›Full record

ReviewDigestion2026

Endoscopic Treatment for Early Barrett's Neoplasia: A Western Perspective.

Edward Young, Joseph Fantasia, Eugene Phan, Rajvinder Singh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digestion, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Edward YoungSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, edward.young@sa.gov.au.
Joseph FantasiaSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Eugene PhanSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Rajvinder SinghSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBarrett's oesophagus (BE) is the sole established precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, with striking contrasts in its epidemiology and management between the East and the West. SUMMARY: This review, based on a structured literature search, examines the key divergences in endoscopic management: highlighting the Western emphasis on eradication therapy using ablation techniques such as radiofrequency ablation, contrasted with the Eastern expertise in advanced resection techniques including endoscopic submucosal dissection. KEY MESSAGES: Despite improving patient outcomes, significant challenges remain, including variable surveillance protocols, controversies regarding non-dysplastic BE and low-grade dysplasia, and optimal strategies for recurrent disease. As gastroesophageal reflux disease and long-segment BE rise in prevalence in the East, and Western proficiency in endoscopic submucosal dissection grows, these once-distinct approaches are poised to converge. As these treatment paradigms align, patients and clinicians alike stand to benefit from more effective, tailored care and better long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaBarrett EsophagusEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagoscopyPrecancerous ConditionsClinical MedicineDisease ManagementEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionHumansPrevalenceRadiofrequency AblationTreatment OutcomeBarrett’s oesophagusEndoscopic mucosal resectionEndoscopic submucosal dissectionOesophageal adenocarcinomaRadiofrequency ablation

Identifiers

PMID40982404
PMCPMC12795542

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.