ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Clinical feasibility of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients on glucocorticoids or immunomodulators: Propensity-score-matched study.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on the study by Fukuya et al. (2025).Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Predicting post-ESD bleeding in elderly patients with early gastrointestinal cancer: an explainable model based on endoscopic features.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Reply to Sah et al.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Evidence on gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) under glucocorticoids or immunomodulators (GC/IM) is limited. We evaluated whether GC/IM use affects gastric ESD outcomes. Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 411 consecutive ESDs (April 2017-April 2022). GC/IM users (n = 32) were compared with controls (n = 379); 1:3 propensity-score matching yielded 27 vs 81 patients. The primary outcome was overall complications, defined as a composite of pain, fever, delayed bleeding, and delayed perforation. Secondary outcomes were each component, intra-procedure perforation, hospital stay, and use of symptom-directed treatments (analgesics, antipyretics, antibiotics). Results: Overall complications were more frequent with GC/IM than controls (44.4% vs 21.0%; Conclusions: In patients receiving GC/IM, gastric ESD was associated with a higher incidence of minor, clinically managed events-chiefly pain and transient fever-whereas major complications remained uncommon. With close monitoring and prompt symptom-directed care, gastric ESD appeared clinically feasible, albeit with slightly greater resource use and observation time.
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.