ArticleClinical and translational gastroenterology2017
Polyp Resection - Controversial Practices and Unanswered Questions.
Article in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differences with experienced nurse assistance during colonoscopy in detecting polyp and adenoma: a randomized clinical trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2018Trial
- Efficacy of additional tissue sections for diminutive colorectal adenomas pathologically diagnosed as normal mucosa: a retrospective, cross-sectional study in Japan.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- The Workgroup Serrated Polyps and Polyposis (WASP) classification for optical diagnosis of colorectal diminutive polyps with iScan and the impact of the revised World Health Organization (WHO) criteria.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Article
- Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for management of colorectal polyps.Journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Ultra-Compact Microsystems-Based Confocal Endomicroscope.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2020Article
- Understanding optical reflectance contrast for real-time characterization of epithelial precursor lesions.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2019Article
- Rapid, High-Resolution, Label-Free, and 3-Dimensional Imaging to Differentiate Colorectal Adenomas and Non-Neoplastic Polyps With Micro-Optical Coherence Tomography.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2019Article
- [Colorectal cancer: role of imaging in screening].Der Radiologe · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection and complete removal of precancerous neoplastic polyps are central to effective colorectal cancer screening. The prevalence of neoplastic polyps in the screening population in the United States is likely >50%. However, most persons with neoplastic polyps are never destined to develop cancer, and do not benefit for finding and removing polyps, and may only be harmed by the procedure. Further 70-80% of polyps are diminutive (≤5 mm) and such polyps almost never contain cancer. Given the questionable benefit, the high-cost and the potential risk changing our approach to the management of diminutive polyps is currently debated. Deemphasizing diminutive polyps and shifting our efforts to detection and complete removal of larger and higher-risk polyps deserves discussion and study. This article explores three controversies, and emerging concepts related to endoscopic polyp resection. First, we discuss challenges of optical resect-and-discard strategy and possible alternatives. Second, we review recent studies that support the use of cold snare resection for ≥5 mm polyps. Thirdly, we examine current evidence for prophylactic clipping after resection of large polyps.
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.