ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Prediction of delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection in early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions by BEST-C score.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
Abstract
backgroundDelayed bleeding is a serious complication after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer and precancerous lesions. Existing prediction models predominantly rely on pre-procedural factors, such as antithrombotic therapy (ATT), and overlook critical intraoperative variables. This study aimed to develop and validate a novel, procedure-centered risk model that integrates these intraoperative variables to improve predictive performance.
methodsIn this retrospective, single-center study, we enrolled 1523 patients undergoing gastric ESD (January 2018 to September 2025). The primary outcome was delayed post-ESD bleeding. We focused on variables available before or immediately after ESD. Independent risk factors were identified via multivariate logistic regression to construct the Bleeding after ESD Trend from China (BEST-C) score. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration, and decision curve analysis, with internal validation via bootstrapping. Its discriminative ability was directly compared with two established models (BEST-J and BEST-FH).
resultsDelayed bleeding occurred in 52 patients (3.4%). Multivariate analysis revealed that dual-ATT interruption, intraoperative bleeding, and the interaction between intraoperative bleeding and muscular layer injury were independent risk factors, whereas the use of hemostatic clips was identified as a protective factor. The BEST-C model demonstrated excellent discrimination (AUC = 0.868) and calibration, significantly outperforming the BEST-J and BEST-FH scores (AUC difference 0.321, P < 0.001). The derived integer score effectively stratified patients into low- (bleeding rate 1.0%), intermediate- (11.6%), and high-risk (88.2%) groups.
conclusionThe BEST-C score, which uniquely incorporates critical intraoperative variables, most notably a key interaction term, provides a robust tool, centered on intraoperative factors, for immediate post-ESD risk stratification of delayed bleeding after gastric ESD. It demonstrates superior predictive performance to existing models and shows promising clinical utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41731144What 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.