Table 5.

Previous studies on endoscopic surgery for perforation.

Author	Year	Sample size	Surgical approach	Outcomes
Chunyan Zeng	2019	12	DFT-ESE	There was no further bleeding or perforation after endoscopic closure of the perforation or wound after dental floss traction DFT-ESE, and no recurrence was found at follow-up.
Chen Du	2017		STER	By creating tunnels, STER maintains the integrity of the mucosa. This promotes wound healing and reduces infection rates.
Ping-Hong Zhou	2011	26	EFR	The key to EFR surgery is to successfully close the wall defect after resection. Failure to close the gap may lead to the occurrence of gastrointestinal fistula and abdominal infection.
Quan-Lin Li	2015	32	STER	The mucosal incision of STER is not in the same place as the tumor resection, which maintains the integrity of the gastrointestinal mucosa. Even if the lesion originates deep in the muscle layer, perforation will not occur. Therefore, STER may reduce postoperative gastrointestinal leakage. and risk of secondary infection.
Jia Liu	2021	397	ESE	Inexperience of doctors is a risk factor for difficult ESE (operative time ≥90 minutes), and poor exposure of the submucosal field is a problem for new doctors.
Qiang Zhang	2016	9	EMSLD	EMSLD preserves the mucosa above the tumor and can effectively reduce suture tension. When a perforation occurs, it can also be closed by retaining the mucosa.