ArticleEndoscopy international open2016
Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma as a shielding technique after endoscopic mucosal resection in rat and porcine models.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02931149 (Evaluation of the Efficacy of Platelet-rich Plasma), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Evaluation of the Efficacy of Platelet-rich Plasma (PRP) on Advanced Endoscopic Resection Techniques
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevention of late complications with coverage agents in endoscopic resection of colorectal lesions: Current landscape in gastrointestinal endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Effectiveness of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Healing of Ulcers after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.Clinical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Submucosal injection of platelet-rich plasma in endoscopic resection of large sessile lesions.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2018Article
- Endoscopic shielding technique, a new method in therapeutic endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsThe aims were to assess the efficacy of endoscopic application of Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to prevent delayed perforation and to induce mucosal healing after endoscopic resections. PATIENTS AND
methodsColonic induced lesions were performed in rats (n = 16) and pigs (n = 4). Animals were randomized to receive onto the lesions saline (control) or PRP. Animals underwent endoscopic follow-up. Thermal injury was assessed with a 1 - 4 scale: (1) mucosal necrosis; (2) submucosal necrosis; (3) muscularis propria necrosis; and (4) serosal necrosis
resultsSaline treatment showed 50 % of mortality in rats (P = 0.02). Mean ulcerated area after 48 hours and 7 days was significantly smaller with PRP than with saline (0.27 ± 0.02 cm(2) and 0.08 ± 0.01 cm(2) vs. 0.56 ± 0.1 cm(2) and 0.40 ± 0.06 cm(2); P < 0.001). The incidence of thermal injury was significantly lower with PRP (1.25 ± 0.46) than in controls (2.25 ± 0.50); P = 0.006. The porcine model showed a trend toward higher mucosal restoration in animals treated with PRP than with saline at weeks 1 and 2 (Median area in cm(2): 0.55 and 0.40 vs. 1.32 and 0.79)
conclusionsApplication of PRP to colonic mucosal lesions showed strong healing properties in rat and porcine models.
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.