Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,547

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Endoscopic mucosal resection for treatment of early gastric cancer

Open access
Ono, H, Kondo, H, Gotoda, T, Shirao, K, Yamaguchi, H, Saito, D, Hosokawa, K, Shimoda, T, Yoshida, S·2001·Gut

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In Japan, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is accepted as a treatment option for cases of early gastric cancer (EGC) where the probability of lymph node metastasis is low. The results of EMR for EGC at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, over a 11 year period are presented. METHODS: EMR was applied to patients with early cancers up to 30 mm in diameter that were of a well or moderately histologically differentiated type, and were superficially elevated and/or depressed (types I, IIa, and IIc) but without ulceration or definite signs of submucosal invasion. The resected specimens were carefully examined by serial sections at 2 mm intervals, and if histopathology revealed submucosal invasion and/or vessel involvement or if the resection margin was not clear, surgery was recommended. RESULTS: Four hundred and seventy nine cancers in 445 patients were treated by EMR from 1987 to 1998 but submucosal invasion was found on subsequent pathological examination in 74 tumours. Sixty nine percent of intramucosal cancers (278/405) were resected with a clear margin. Of 127 cancers without “complete resection”, 14 underwent an additional operation and nine were treated endoscopically; the remainder had intensive follow up. Local recurrence in the stomach occurred in 17 lesions followed conservatively, in one lesion treated endoscopically, and in five lesions with complete resection. All tumours were diagnosed by follow up endoscopy and subsequently treated by surgery. There were no gastric cancer related deaths during a median follow up period of 38 months (3–120 months). Bleeding and perforation (5%) were two major complications of EMR but there were no treatment related deaths. CONCLUSION: In our experience, EMR allows us to perform less invasive treatment without sacrificing the possibility of cure.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/gut.48.2.225

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,547

Metadata

Authors
Ono, H., Kondo, H., Gotoda, T., Shirao, K., Yamaguchi, H., Saito, D., Hosokawa, K., Shimoda, T., & Yoshida, S.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2001-02-01
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
225-229
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2105426062
Cited by
1,547
References
0
FWCI
30.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Endoscopic mucosal resection for treatment of early gastric cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.48.2.225
The paper
Ono, H., Kondo, H., Gotoda, T., Shirao, K., Yamaguchi, H., Saito, D., Hosokawa, K., Shimoda, T., & Yoshida, S. (2001). Endoscopic mucosal resection for treatment of early gastric cancer. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.48.2.225

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.