ArticleDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2016
[Full thickness resection device (FTRD). Experience and outcome for benign neoplasms of the rectum and colon].
Article in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection for upper gastrointestinal tract lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Full-thickness Resection Device (FTRD) for Colorectal Lesions Endoscopic Full-thickness Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical gastroenterology · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of endoscopic full-thickness resection in the colon and rectum using an over-the-scope device: a meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Pooled it
- Adverse events associated with full-thickness resection devices in gastrointestinal endoscopy: National postmarketing surveillance study.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Initial Experience With Safety and Efficacy of Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Case Series.ACG case reports journal · 2024Article
- Endoscopic resection of upper gastrointestinal lesions using the colonic Ovesco full-thickness resection device: Retrospective observational case series of 22 cases.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022Review
- Current Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Gastrointestinal Lesions: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, Submucosal Dissection, and Full-Thickness Resection.Visceral medicine · 2021Review
- Laparoscopic wedge resection as an alternative to laparoscopic oncological colon resection for benign endoscopically unresectable colon polyps.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2021Article
- Technical success, resection status, and procedural complication rate of colonoscopic full-wall resection: a pooled analysis from 7 hospitals of different care levels.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- A large multicenter cohort on the use of full-thickness resection device for difficult colonic lesions.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- Current Status and Prospects of Endoscopic Resection Technique for Colorectal Tumors.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2021Review
- Full-thickness resection device (FTRD) for treatment of upper gastrointestinal tract lesions: the first international experience.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Dissection-enabled scaffold-assisted resection (DeSCAR): a novel technique for resection of residual or non-lifting gastrointestinal neoplasia of the colon, expanded experience and follow-up.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection of early colorectal neoplasms using an endoscopic submucosal dissection knife: a retrospective multicenter study.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Endoscopic mucosal resection with an additional working channel (EMR+) in a porcine ex vivo model: a novel technique to improve en bloc resection rate of snare polypectomy.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) in the lower gastrointestinal tract.Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection using an over-the-scope device for treatment of recurrent / residual colorectal neoplasia: a single-center case series.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection of Colorectal Lesions with the New FTRD System: Single-Center Experience.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnostic validity of a full-thickness resection is higher compared to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic mucosal dissection (ESD). Whereas transanal endoscopic microsurgery techniques (TEM, TAMIS) are established therapeutic procedures in the rectum no established and safe minimally invasive or endoscopic procedure exists in the colon.
aimIn this study the novel endoscopic full thickness resection device (FTRD, Ovesco, Germany) was investigated concerning success rates with histologically proven full thickness resections, R0 status as well as patient and device safety for the rectum and colon.
methodIn the period from November 2014 to June 2015 full thickness resections in the rectum and colon were performed with the FTRD in 20 patients. Data on technical success, R0 resection rate and histologically confirmed full thickness resections were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsThe following indications were treated in the rectum (n = 11) and colon (n = 9): T1 carcinoma (n = 6) and neuroendocrine tumors (n = 2), untreated and nonlifting adenomas (n = 3) and incomplete resection of adenomas with low and high grade dysplasia (n = 9). The technical success rate was 75 %, 3 technical failures made a conventional polypectomy necessary in 2 patients and in 1 patient an operative resection of the duplicated intestinal wall had to be performed. The median endoscopic follow-up time was 61.5 days (n = 10) and in 7 patients the clip had dislodged at the first follow-up. A thermal perforation in one case of conventional polypectomy gave rise to indications for a partial resection of the colon. In one patient the lesion in the cecum could be reached but not treated for technical reasons. The histological R0 rate was 80 %, whereas the full thickness resection rate was 60 % (85.7 % in the colon and 54.6 % in the rectum). In two patients with carcinoma and incomplete FTRD, surgical treatment was performed. The median size of the resection specimen was 5 cm(2) (range 1.6-12.9 cm(2)).
conclusionThe results show that FTRD is a safe and effective instrument for use in the lower gastrointestinal tract. Limitations of the FTRD system concerning full thickness resection are scarring, fibrosis and thickness of the intestinal wall, especially in the lower rectum; therefore, it is suggested that a simulation with a tube similar in size to the FTRD should be performed during the screening colonoscopy in order to establish whether an endoscopic resection with FTRD is possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.