Construction and analysis of an ulcer risk prediction model after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer

Table 1 Comparison of general information of ulcer group and non-ulcer group, n (%)

General Information	Ulcer group (n = 40)	Non-ulcer group (n = 156)	t/χ2 value	P value
Sex			0.83	0.362
Male	26 (65.00)	89 (57.05)
Female	14 (35.00)	67 (42.95)
Age	48.98 ± 8.23	47.11 ± 9.02	1.257	0.213
BMI	22.25 ± 2.01	21.83 ± 1.98	1.183	0.242
Course of disease (yr)	2.85 ± 0.48	2.66 ± 0.52	2.195	0.032
History of H. pylori infection	7 (17.50)	11 (7.05)	4.168	0.041
Family history of GC	8 (20.00)	22 (14.10)	0.854	0.355
Drinking history	9 (22.50)	26 (16.67)	0.739	0.39
Smoking history	24 (60.00)	66 (42.31)	4.013	0.045
Comorbidities
Hypertension	9 (22.50)	26 (16.67)	0.739	0.39
Diabetes	6 (15.00)	22 (14.10)	0.021	0.885
Coronary heart disease	7 (17.50)	23 (14.75)	0.187	0.666
Residence			0.116	0.733
Rural	25 (62.50)	102 (65.38)
Town	15 (37.50)	54 (34.62)
Medication history
Aspirin	12 (30.00)	28 (17.95)	2.847	0.092
Clopidogrel	19 (47.50)	27 (17.31)	16.158	< 0.001

BMI: Body mass index; H. pylori: Helicobacter pylori; GC: Gastric cancer.

Table 2 Comparison of pathological features of ulcer group and non-ulcer group, n (%)

Pathological features	Ulcer group (n = 40)	Non-ulcer group (n = 156)	t/χ2 value	P value
Lesion diameter (cm)	4.40 ± 0.97	2.97 ± 0.62	8.871	< 0.001
Number of tumors			4.185	0.041
Single shot	18 (45.00)	98 (62.83)
Multiple	22 (55.00)	58 (37.18)
Pathological type			0.268	0.605
Differentiated carcinoma	19 (47.50)	67 (42.95)
Undifferentiated carcinoma	21 (52.50)	89 (57.05)
Infiltration depth			3.988	0.046
Submucosa	21 (52.50)	55 (35.26)
Mucosal layer	19 (47.50)	101 (64.74)
Vascular invasion	2 (5.00)	6 (3.85)	0.108	0.742

Table 3 Comparison of endoscopic features of ulcer group and non-ulcer group, n (%)

Endoscopic features	Ulcer group (n = 40)	Non-ulcer group (n = 156)	χ2 value	P value
Lesion site			2.132	0.344
Upper 1/3 of stomach	12 (30.00)	61 (39.10)
1/3 of stomach	20 (50.00)	76 (48.72)
Lower 1/3 of stomach	8 (20.00)	19 (12.18)
Mucosal discoloration	28 (70.00)	63 (40.38)	11.227	< 0.001
Convergence folds	28 (60.00)	49 (31.41)	19.877	< 0.001
Lesion surface			1.105	0.576
Bulge	11 (27.50)	52 (33.33)
Flat	15 (37.50)	62 (39.74)
Sag	14 (35.00)	42 (26.93)

Table 4 Multivariate logistic regression analysis on the risk of ulcers after endoscopic submucosal dissection in early gastric cancer patients

Related indicator	β	SE	Wald	P value	OR	95%CI
						Lower	Upper
Lesion diameter	3.417	0.647	27.927	< 0.001	30.490	8.584	108.294
Clopidogrel medication history	1.268	0.642	3.899	0.048	3.554	1.009	12.515
Convergent folds	1.351	0.659	4.195	0.041	3.860	1.060	14.055
Mucosal discoloration	1.160	0.584	3.950	0.047	3.191	1.016	10.021

OR: Odds ratios.

Table 5 Evaluation of prediction model for ulcer occurrence after endoscopic submucosal dissection in early gastric cancer patients

Indicator	AUC	SD	P value	95%CI
				Lower	Upper
Lesion diameter	0.885	0.036	< 0.001	0.814	0.955
Clopidogrel medication history	0.651	0.052	0.003	0.549	0.753
Mucosal discoloration	0.648	0.048	0.004	0.554	0.742
Convergent folds	0.693	0.047	< 0.001	0.601	0.785
Prediction model	0.916	0.026	0.000	0.865	0.967

AUC: Area under the curve.