Copyright
©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Oct 16, 2024; 16(10): 545-556
Published online Oct 16, 2024. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v16.i10.545
Published online Oct 16, 2024. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v16.i10.545
Table 1 Comparison of baseline characteristics between the two groups
Characteristic | Control group (n = 260) | Study group (n = 260) | P value | |
Gender | Male/female | 95/165 | 99/161 | 0.717 |
Age (years) | 53.01 ± 10.37 | 52.23 ± 11.92 | 0.428 | |
Tumor location | Gastric fundus/gastric body | 143/117 | 146/114 | 0.791 |
Tumor long diameter | 6.72 ± 2.22 | 6.53 ± 2.16 | 0.320 | |
Tumor growth pattern | Endoluminal/partially exophytic | 253/7 | 253/7 | > 0.999 |
Tumor pathological type | Leiomyoma | 161 | 139 | 0.062 |
Schwannoma | 0 | 1 | > 0.999 | |
Gastrointestinal stromal tumor | 99 | 120 | 0.076 | |
Gastrointestinal stromal tumor risk stratification | Very low risk | 98 | 120 | 0.452 |
Low risk | 1 | 0 | ||
Intermediate risk | 0 | 0 | ||
High risk | 0 | 0 |
- Citation: Lin XM, Peng YM, Zeng HT, Yang JX, Xu ZL. Endoscopic “calabash” ligation and resection for small gastric mesenchymal tumors. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2024; 16(10): 545-556
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v16/i10/545.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v16.i10.545