ArticleBMC medicine2026
Is random biopsy necessary for normal esophageal mucosa during chromoendoscopy? Evidence from a population-based cohort study.
Article in BMC medicine, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEsophageal squamous intraepithelial neoplasia could be detected in normally stained mucosa under Lugol's chromoendoscopy. We aim to determine whether an active biopsy should be performed on such mucosa.
methodsThis study was based on a population-based screening cohort where participants underwent Lugol's chromoendoscopy with biopsies taken from abnormal-unstaining areas and normally stained standard site. A total of 641 participants with esophageal squamous intraepithelial neoplasia or more severe lesions were included in the analysis. The cumulative incidence of high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia/esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (HGIN/ESCC) and ESCC-specific mortality were compared between participants biopsied from iodine unstained and stained areas. Additionally, paired eligible tissues were utilized for comparative genomic analysis.
resultsFor participants diagnosed with low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LGIN), HGIN, and ESCC, 292 (54.8%), 11 (14.9%), and 1 (2.9%) cases, respectively, were biopsied from normal-staining mucosa. Over a median 9.5-year follow-up, no incident HGIN/ESCC cases were identified among individuals with LGIN diagnosed from normal-staining esophageal mucosa. In contrast, LGIN cases detected in unstained lesions exhibited a cumulative incidence of HGIN/ESCC of 15.8 (95% CI, 11.4-21.0) per 100 persons. No ESCC-related deaths occurred in patients having normal-staining lesions, irrespective of pathological grade. Contrastingly, cumulative ESCC-specific mortality per 100 persons for LGIN, HGIN, and ESCC patients of unstained lesions were 2.1 (95% CI, 0.7-4.8), 14.3 (95% CI, 6.7-25.4), and 36.4 (95% CI, 20.4-54.9), respectively. Genomic analysis revealed minimal copy number variants in normally stained lesions compared to substantial alterations in unstained lesions.
conclusionsRandom biopsies of normally stained esophageal mucosa under Lugol's chromoendoscopy should be unnecessary for population-level ESCC screening.
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.