Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42301471›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026

Optimal timing of endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric epithelial neoplasms: impact of preoperative waiting time on clinical outcomes.

Shinya Hoki, Tetsuya Yoshizaki, Risa Ashizaki, Yuta Higasa, Hiroshi Tanabe, Eri Nishikawa, Ryosuke Ishida, Hitomi Hori, Tatsuya Nakai, Chise Ueda and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Shinya HokiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Tetsuya YoshizakiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan. yoshizak@med.kobe-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4315-4766
Risa AshizakiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Yuta HigasaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Hiroshi TanabeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Eri NishikawaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Ryosuke IshidaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Hitomi HoriDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Tatsuya NakaiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Chise UedaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Yusaku ShimamotoDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Satoshi UrakamiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Hirofumi AbeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Madoka TakaoDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Toshitatsu TakaoDepartment of Medical Device Engineering, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan.
Yoshinori MoritaDepartment of Medical Device Engineering, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan.
Takashi ToyonagaDepartment of Endoscopy, Kobe University Hospital, Kobe, Japan.
Yuzo KodamaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-1 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is considered the standard treatment for gastric epithelial neoplasms (GEN). However, the waiting time between the diagnosis of GEN and undergoing ESD varies among patients, and its effect on clinical outcomes remains to be elucidated. This study aimed to assess the impact of waiting time on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing ESD for GEN.

methodsThis retrospective study included 797 patients with 994 lesions who underwent ESD for GEN between April 2013 and March 2018. Waiting time was defined as the period between endoscopic diagnosis and ESD. Patients were divided into two groups based on waiting time: < 90 days (short group) and ≥ 90 days (long group). The primary outcome was disease-specific survival, and secondary outcomes included overall survival, the cumulative incidence of metachronous GEN, and curative resection rates.

resultsProlonged waiting time was associated with ASA PS III and a preoperative histological diagnosis of non-cancer. Short-term outcomes were unaffected by waiting time. Specially, the odds of non-curative resection did not significantly change for 30-day increments in waiting time (OR 1.09; 95%CI 0.94-1.25; p = 0.25). Hazard function analysis suggested a visual upward trend in the risk of non-curative resection after 180 days. Long-term outcomes were unaffected by waiting time.

conclusionsIn conclusion, waiting times up to one year were not associated with clinical outcomes. A potential risk increase after 180 days was suggested visually but remained statistically inconclusive, serving only as an exploratory reference point.

Indexed as

Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialStomach NeoplasmsTime-to-TreatmentAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsTreatment DelayTreatment OutcomeEndoscopic submucosal dissectionStomach neoplasmsTime to treatmentTreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID42301471

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.