ArticleEndoscopy international open2018
Endoscopic full-thickness resection with an over-the-scope clip device (FTRD) in the colorectum: results from a university tertiary referral center.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRDDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Outcomes of endoscopic full thickness resection in the colon rectum at an Italian tertiary center.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Review
- 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
- Clinical guidance on endoscopic management of colonic polyps in Singapore.Singapore medical journal · 2022Article
- Large polyps: Pearls for the referring and receiving endoscopist.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021Review
- Current Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Gastrointestinal Lesions: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection, Submucosal Dissection, and Full-Thickness Resection.Visceral medicine · 2021Review
- 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
- Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection using a clip non-exposed method for gastrointestinal tract lesions: a meta-analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) in the lower gastrointestinal tract.Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Article
- Resection of colonic lesions: full thickness, full monty?Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Article
- Importance of Resection Margins in the Treatment of Rectal Adenomas by Transanal Endoscopic Surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 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
- Now, More than Ever Before, Colonoscopy Is a Therapeutic Procedure.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection of colorectal lesions with the full-thickness resection device: clinical experience from two referral centers in Greece.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsThe full-thickness resection device (FTRD) represents a novel endoscopic treatment method for lesions unresectable with conventional endoscopic techniques. The overall aim of this study was to evaluate technical success and in toto resection rates, recurrence rates, as well as immediate or late complications in patients who underwent polyp removal with the FTRD. PATIENTS AND
methodsData from a prospectively collected database of 12 patients who underwent 13 over-the-scope clip-based full-thickness resections between June 2015 and June 2017 were analyzed. Follow-up endoscopy was performed in 11 out of 12 patients.
results13 full-thickness resections were performed in 7 males and 5 females (mean age 64.3 ± 6.3 years). Mean size of the lesions removed with FTRD was 17 ± 4 mm. Location was rectum (n = 6), cecum (n = 2), ascending colon (n = 2), left flexure (n = 1) and right flexure (n = 2). Mean procedure time was 68 ± 35 minutes and mean hospital stay was 2.5 ± 1.2 days. 2 patients developed post-polypectomy syndrome, which resolved after conservative treatment. No perforations and no immediate surgical revision were needed. Histology of the 13 lesions removed with FTRD showed 5 adenomas with low grade intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN), 4 high grade IEN, 1 fibrosis, 1 fibrosis without dysplasia and 2 adenocarcinomas. Technical success was achieved in all procedures (13/13, 100 %). R0 resection was achieved in 10/12 patients (83.3 %). 2 patients underwent surgery because of recurrence or not evaluable margins. In 1 patient no residual malignancy was proven in histological examination, in the other patient residual low grade IEN adenoma.
conclusionFTRD is a minimally invasive approach with good success rate of complete resection and minimal side effects.
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.