ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Feasibility and safety of cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric adenocarcinoma of the fundic gland type.
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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimGastric adenocarcinoma of the fundic gland type (GA-FG) is a rare gastric cancer subtype, usually located in the upper stomach and accompanied by submucosal invasion. Although endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment, it is challenging in this location. Cap-assisted endoscopic mucosal resection (EMRC) may represent a simpler alternative; however, its efficacy and safety for GA-FG remain unclear. We therefore assessed the feasibility, safety, and histological resection depth of EMRC for GA-FG, vs. ESD.
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included consecutive patients with histologically confirmed GA-FG measuring < 10 mm. They underwent ESD between August 2013 and February 2023 or EMRC between February 2023 and July 2025. Clinical outcomes, pathological findings, and delayed adverse events were compared. The distance from the muscularis mucosae to the deepest resection margin and the proportion of submucosal tissue in the resected specimens were also evaluated in the EMRC group.
resultsWe analyzed 94 lesions (ESD: n = 54, EMRC: n = 40). En bloc resection was achieved in all cases. The median procedure time was significantly longer for ESD vs. EMRC (25.0 vs. 6.0 min, P < 0.01), as was hospitalization length (7.0 vs. 5.0 days, P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding vertical margin status or adverse events. All EMRC specimens contained submucosal tissue, with a median resection depth of 817.5 μm (interquartile range 526.6-1768.4). Treatment modality was determined according to the treatment period (ESD before February 2023 and EMRC thereafter), which may have introduced temporal and selection bias.
conclusionsFor GA-FG lesions measuring < 10 mm, EMRC appears to be a promising treatment option, providing adequate submucosal resection depth while reducing procedure and hospitalization time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42844368What 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.