ArticleSurgical endoscopy2014
TEMS: results of a specialist centre.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2015Review
- Local excision by transanal endoscopic surgery.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
- Full-thickness excision using transanal endoscopic microsurgery for treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTransanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) is becoming more widespread due to the increasing body of evidence to support its role. Previous published data has reported recurrence rates in excess of 10% for benign polyps after TEMS.
methodsBradford Royal Infirmary is a tertiary referral centre for TEMS and early rectal cancer in the UK. Data for all TEMS operations were entered into a prospective database over a 7-year period. Demographic data, complications and recurrence rates were recorded. Both benign adenomas and malignant lesions were included.
resultsA total of 164 patients (65% male), with a mean age of 68 years were included; 114 (70%) of the lesions resected were benign adenomas, and 50 (30%) were malignant lesions. Median polyp size was 4 (range 0.6-14.5) cm. Mean length of operation was 55 (range 10-120) min. There were no recurrences in any patients with a benign adenoma resected; two patients with malignant lesions developed recurrences. Three intra-operative complications were recorded, two rectal perforations (repaired primarily, one requiring defunctioning stoma), and a further patient suffered a blood loss of >300 ml requiring transfusion. Six patients developed strictures requiring dilation either endoscopically or under anaesthetic in the post-operative period.
conclusionsWe have demonstrated that TEMS procedures performed in a specialist centre provide low rates of both recurrence and complication. Within a specialist centre, TEMS surgery should be offered to all patients for rectal lesions, both benign and malignant, that are amenable to TEMS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24414462What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.