Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2016
Closure with clips to accelerate healing of mucosal defects caused by colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Review on colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection focusing on the technical aspect.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Pooled it
- Effect of prophylactic clip placement following endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal lesions on delayed polypectomy bleeding: A meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- Clinical usefulness of the hold-and-drag closure using the SB clip for large mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Efficacy of prophylactic hemoclip placement for preventing delayed post-polypectomy bleeding in nonpedunculated colorectal lesions: updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Review
- Endoscopic Closure After Colorectal ESD: A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis on Its Efficacy in Preventing Adverse Events.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Novel Flexible Endoscopic C-shaped Suturing Device for Gastrointestinal Wound Closure: First Survival Study in Pigs (With Video).Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Endoscopic suturing for mucosal defect closure following endoscopic submucosal dissection: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2024Review
- Article
- Management of complications related to colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.Clinical endoscopy · 2023Review
- Complications after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal cancer (Review).Oncology letters · 2023Review
- Article
- New Closure Method Using Loop and Open-Close Clips after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Stomach and Colon Lesions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Role of prophylactic hemoclip placement in prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding for large colon polyps: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Annals of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding: Should we amend the 2017 ESGE Guideline?Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Feasibility of endoscopic suturing to prevent adverse events and hospitalization after endoscopic submucosal dissection.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- The Efficacy and Safety of a Promising Single-Channel Endoscopic Closure Technique for Endoscopic Treatment-Related Artificial Ulcers: A Pilot Study.Gastrointestinal tumors · 2020Article
- Complete closure versus simple closure for perforations during colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost mucosal defects that occur with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be closed completely using endoscopic clips. However, benefits of such closure in wound healing are unknown. A randomized controlled study evaluated the efficacy of closure with clips compared with no closure.
methodTwenty-eight patients who had undergone ESD were randomly divided into two groups: closure (n = 14) and non-closure groups (n = 14). In the closure group, the mucosal defect resulting from ESD was closed using endoscopic clips. Four weeks after ESD, defects in both groups were observed by colonoscopy. Efficacy was based on change in the area of the defect, percentage of complete healing in each group, and complications.
resultData were analyzed for 26 of the 28 patients (13, closure group; 13, non-closure group). All tumors were resected en bloc by ESD without bleeding or perforation. In the closure group, the area of the defect just after ESD was 677 ± 306 mm(2) (mean ± SD) as determined by the size of the removed lesion and had decreased to 2.17 ± 4.51 mm(2) at 4 weeks after ESD (reduction, 99.7 %), but in the non-closure group that area was 790 ± 221 mm(2) and had decreased to 27.42 ± 25.72 mm(2) at 4 weeks post-ESD (reduction, 96.2 %). The reduction rate was significantly higher in the closure than in the non-closure group (99.7 vs. 96.2 %, p = 0.010). Complete healing was 69.2 % in the closure group vs. 7.7 % in the non-closure group (p = 0.005). Multivariate analysis showed that closure of the mucosal defect (OR 24.029, 95 % CI 2.09-276.15, p = 0.011) was an independent factor associated with complete healing at 4 weeks after ESD. Delayed perforation or post-ESD bleeding was not observed in any participant.
conclusionUse of endoscopic clips for closure of defects after ESD is safe and efficacious in accelerating wound healing.
trial registrationUMIN-CTR UMIN000009112.
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.