ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2025
Study on the Accuracy of Miniprobe Ultrasonic Gastroscopy in Determining the Depth of Infiltration of Early Gastric Cancer.
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: T staging is required before choosing the treatment modality for early gastric cancer (EGC). Ultrasound endoscopy (EUS) is a commonly used method for T staging of EGC. However, the results of studies on the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing the depth of EGC infiltration have been inconsistent. The purpose of this article is to investigate the overall accuracy of miniprobe EUS for diagnosing EGC infiltration depth and to explore the risk factors affecting the accuracy of miniprobe EUS. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 136 patients with EGC, all of whom underwent preoperative EUS T staging and pathological specimens were obtained by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or radical surgery. The accuracy of miniprobe EUS in determining EGC was assessed by comparing the concordance between EGC EUS T staging and histopathological diagnosis and analyzing the lesion characterization factors affecting the accuracy of EUS. Results: By analyzing the 136 EGC cases included, the overall accuracy of miniprobe EUS for EGC T stage was 77.2% (105/136); the accuracy of miniprobe EUS for diagnosing T1a and T1b EGC was 80.7% (92/114) and 59.1% (13/22), respectively. Lesions combined with ulcers (OR: 3.221; 95% CI: 1.084-9.570; Conclusions: The accuracy of miniprobe EUS in diagnosing T1a EGC is high, and the accuracy in diagnosing T1b EGC is relatively low. Miniprobe EUS is less accurate in determining the depth of infiltration of EGCs combined with ulcers and with a depressed morphology. EGCs are more prone to be combined with ulcers in the setting of a presenting infection of
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.