ArticleScientific reports2025
Predictors of post-endoscopic submucosal dissection stricture in superficial esophageal cancer patients receiving oral steroid prophylaxis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- An Integrated Circumferential Proportion and Defect Length Index for Predicting Esophageal Stricture After ESD in Large Mucosal Defects ≥6 cm.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Identify risk factors for esophageal stricture persisting despite standard oral steroid prophylaxis after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for large-area superficial esophageal cancer.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 202 patients undergoing ESD (≥ 2/3 circumferential resection) with postoperative oral steroids. Patients were stratified by stricture occurrence. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression evaluated lesion/ESD-related risk factors. Refractory stricture (RS; requiring ≥ 5 endoscopic dilations) and non-refractory stricture (NRS) groups were compared for endoscopic balloon/bougie dilation (EBD) continuation rates.Results: The overall stricture rate was 35.2% (71/202). Multivariate analysis identified four independent risk factors: longitudinal diameter ≥ 5 cm (OR 3.06, 95%CI 1.38–6.80), circumferential involvement > 4/5 (OR 6.41, 95%CI 2.79–14.67), entire circumferential involvement (OR 54.91, 95%CI 11.02-273.68), and muscular injury (OR 21.89, 95%CI 4.04-118.58). EBD continuing rates at 1 year were 70% (RS) vs.22.9% (NRS); at 3 years, rates decreased to 20% (RS) and 2.1% (NRS). RS showed significantly higher EBD continuation (Chi-square 8.404, P = 0.004).Conclusion: In patients with large superficial esophageal cancers involving ≥ 2/3 circumference who receive oral steroid prophylaxis, circumferential involvement ≥ 4/5 or entire circumferential involvement, longitudinal lesions ≥ 5 cm, and muscular injury independently predict steroid-resistant strictures post-ESD. High-risk patients require cautious ESD planning and novel stricture prevention strategies. RS necessitates prolonged EBD management, reflecting poorer therapeutic response.
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.