ArticleiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2022
Follow-up after endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer in 3 French referral centers.
Article in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Endoscopic resection is the recommended staging and treatment modality for early gastric cancer (EGC). However, in Europe, data on long-term treatment outcomes and the occurrence of metachronous gastric cancer are lacking. Methods: Endoscopic resection for EGC was performed in 108 patients in 3 French referral centers. Resections were classified as eCuraA, B, C-1, or C-2 according to the new Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines and European guidelines. Patients who did not undergo secondary surgery and had follow-up data after 6 months were included in the analysis. Results: One hundred eight patients underwent endoscopic resection for EGC. Surgery was performed in 32 patients after endoscopic resection. Forty-five patients had follow-up visits at ≥6 months: 27 with an eCuraA resection, 1 with an eCuraB resection, 6 with an eCuraC-1 resection, and 11 with an eCuraC-2 resection. During a median follow-up time of 29.39 months, metachronous recurrence was observed in 12 patients (12/45; 26.7%) with a median period of 15.43 months (range, 7-44). Metastatic recurrence was observed in 3 patients (3/45, 6.7%), with a median period of 28.91 months (range, 7.52-28.91). Morbidity and mortality at day 30 after endoscopic resection were 2.8% (3/108) and 0.9% (1/108), respectively. Metachronous recurrences were diagnosed in 18.5% of the eCuraA group, 0% of the eCuraB group, 33.3% of the eCura C-1 group, and 45.5% of the eCura C-2 group; the differences were not statistically significant ( Conclusion: The rate of metachronous recurrence after endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer was very high, even after a curative resection. Close endoscopic surveillance is necessary to diagnose and treat metachronous gastric cancer.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.