ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2025
Feasibility of sentinel basin mapping after non-curative endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study (SENORITA 2 trial).
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sentinel Node Navigation Surgery for Upper Gastrointestinal Malignancies: Current Status, Clinical Significance, and Future Perspectives.Magyar onkologia · 2026Review
- Variable sensitivity despite high detection rates: is sentinel node navigation surgery feasible following non-curative gastric ESD?International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Is sentinel node navigation surgery feasible after non-curative endoscopic resection in patients with early gastric cancer?Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor "Feasibility of sentinel basin mapping after non-curative endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study (SENORITA 2 Trial)".International journal of surgery (London, England) · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandard treatment for non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of early gastric cancer is radical gastrectomy with systematic lymph node dissection. However, the actual incidence of lymph node metastasis was reported to be 5-10%. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of sentinel basin mapping after non-curative ESD for early gastric cancer.
methodsThis is a multicenter, prospective feasibility study. Patients who underwent ESD for early gastric cancer and had a non-curative resection on final pathology were included. Sentinel basin mapping was performed using one of two methods: (1) endoscopic submucosal injection of a dual tracer, including a radioisotope and indocyanine green (ICG); or (2) fluorescence imaging after ICG injection. Following dissection of the identified sentinel basins, laparoscopic gastrectomy with D1 + lymphadenectomy was performed in all patients. The primary endpoint was the detection rate; secondary endpoints were sensitivity and postoperative complications.
resultsA total of 243 patients were enrolled from April 2017 to July 2024, and data from 238 eligible patients were analyzed. The dual tracer and fluorescence imaging with ICG were used in 216 and 22 patients, respectively. The overall detection rate was 97.1% (231/238), and metastatic lymph nodes were observed in 23 patients (9.7%, 23/238). The sensitivity was 69.6% (16/23) with 7 false-negative cases. Univariate analysis to identify risk factors for false-negative events showed that the early study period and institution had a nonsignificant trend. The postoperative complication rate was 10.1%, and the severe complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) was 2.5%.
conclusionSentinel basin mapping after non-curative ESD achieved a high detection rate of 97.1%. However, the false-negative rate of 30.4% appears to be unacceptably high from an oncological safety perspective.
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.