FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3004708924> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3004708924 endingPage "4064" @default.
• W3004708924 startingPage "4053" @default.
• W3004708924 abstract "Abstract Background and aims Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) has been increasingly applied in the treatment of gastric submucosal tumors (G-SMTs) with explorative intention. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and clinical outcomes of EFTR and surgical intervention for the management of muscularis propria (MP)-derived G-SMTs. Methods Between September 2011 and May 2019, the clinical records of patients with MP-derived G-SMTs undergoing EFTR at our endoscopic unit were collected. A cohort of people with primary MP-derived G-SMTs treated by surgery was matched in a 1:1 ratio to EFTR group with regard to patients’ baseline characteristics, clinicopathologic features of the tumor and the procedure date. The perioperative outcomes and follow-up data were analyzed. Results In total, 62 and 62 patients were enrolled into the surgery and EFTR group, respectively, with median follow-up of 786 days. The size of G-SMTs (with ulceration) ranged from 10 to 90 mm. For patients with tumor smaller than 30 mm, surgery and EFTR group presented comparable procedural success rate (both were 100%), en bloc resection rate (100% vs. 94.7%), tumor capsule rupture rate (0% vs. 5.3%), and pathological R0 resection rate (both were 100%). EFTR had a statistically significant advantage over surgery for estimated blood loss (3.12 ± 5.20 vs. 46.97 ± 60.73 ml, p ≤ 0.001), discrepancy between the pre- and postprocedural hemoglobin level (5.18 ± 5.43 vs. 9.84 ± 8.25 g/L, p = 0.005), bowel function restoration [1 (0–5) vs. 3 (1–5) days, p ≤ 0.001], and hospital cost (28,617.09 ± 6720.78 vs. 33,963.10 ± 13,454.52 Yuan, p = 0.033). The patients with tumor larger than 30 mm showed roughly the same outcomes after comparison analysis of the two groups. However, the clinical data revealed lower en bloc resection rate (75.0% vs. 100%, p = 0.022) and higher tumor capsule rupture rate (25.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.022) for EFTR when compared to surgery. The procedure time, duration of postprocedural fasting and antibiotics usage, and hospital stay of the two groups were equivalent. The occurrence rate of adverse events within postoperative day 7 were 74.2% and 72.6% after EFTR and surgery, respectively ( p = 1.000). No complications occurred during the follow-up. Conclusion For treatment of MP-derived G-SMTs (with or without ulceration), our study showed the feasibility and safety of EFTR, which also provided better results in terms of procedural blood loss, the postoperative bowel function restoration and cost-effectiveness when compared to surgery, whereas the surgery was superior in en bloc resection rate for G-SMTs larger than 30 mm. The postprocedural clinical outcomes seemed to be equivalent in these two resection methods." @default.
• W3004708924 created "2020-02-14" @default.
• W3004708924 creator A5014640761 @default.
• W3004708924 creator A5021844102 @default.
• W3004708924 creator A5029816792 @default.
• W3004708924 creator A5046482405 @default.
• W3004708924 creator A5076165708 @default.
• W3004708924 creator A5083669392 @default.
• W3004708924 date "2020-02-03" @default.
• W3004708924 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W3004708924 title "Resection of the gastric submucosal tumor (G-SMT) originating from the muscularis propria layer: comparison of efficacy, patients’ tolerability, and clinical outcomes between endoscopic full-thickness resection and surgical resection" @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1418867790 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1534571176 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1586511615 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1749324649 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1952347198 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1965309903 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1980470008 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1983551172 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1987037759 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1991356768 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W1994917607 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2004911961 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2012571334 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2024384958 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2027173634 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2032771230 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2033302408 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2040464605 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2042328123 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2043516013 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2059242879 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W206694649 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2068101607 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2079152675 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2081852044 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2097476431 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2123232650 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2128229019 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2151347406 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2159672249 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2466706718 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2491257700 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2515197178 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2604768315 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2616268096 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2743171332 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2791276334 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2799444474 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2799783383 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2799834185 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2802333306 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W2954435834 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W4285097283 @default.
• W3004708924 cites W4376848385 @default.
• W3004708924 doi "https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07311-x" @default.
• W3004708924 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/7394934" @default.
• W3004708924 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32016516" @default.
• W3004708924 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3004708924 type Work @default.
• W3004708924 sameAs 3004708924 @default.
• W3004708924 citedByCount "29" @default.
• W3004708924 countsByYear W30047089242020 @default.
• W3004708924 countsByYear W30047089242021 @default.
• W3004708924 countsByYear W30047089242022 @default.
• W3004708924 countsByYear W30047089242023 @default.
• W3004708924 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3004708924 hasAuthorship W3004708924A5014640761 @default.
• W3004708924 hasAuthorship W3004708924A5021844102 @default.
• W3004708924 hasAuthorship W3004708924A5029816792 @default.
• W3004708924 hasAuthorship W3004708924A5046482405 @default.
• W3004708924 hasAuthorship W3004708924A5076165708 @default.
• W3004708924 hasAuthorship W3004708924A5083669392 @default.
• W3004708924 hasBestOaLocation W30047089241 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C159110652 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C197934379 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C2778375690 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C2778866283 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C2780120127 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C31174226 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C41260117 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConcept C90924648 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C126322002 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C141071460 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C159110652 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C197934379 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C2778375690 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C2778866283 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C2780120127 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C31174226 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C41260117 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C71924100 @default.
• W3004708924 hasConceptScore W3004708924C90924648 @default.
• W3004708924 hasIssue "9" @default.
• W3004708924 hasLocation W30047089241 @default.

• next