ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2019
Endoscopic resection of colorectal circumferential and near-circumferential laterally spreading lesions: outcomes and risk of stenosis.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel approach to preventing adverse events after circumferential endoscopic submucosal dissection of the ileocecal valve.Endoscopy · 2026Article
- Article
- Ureteric stricture of a solitary kidney secondary to retroperitoneal inflammation after EMR.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlmost any colorectal superficial neoplastic lesion can be treated by endoscopic resection (ER) but very little is known about outcomes of ER leaving circumferential or near-circumferential mucosal defects. We report the outcomes of ER leaving ≥ 75% circumferential mucosal defects performed in a western expert centre.
methodsFive hundred eighty-seven ERs of large colorectal lesions ≥ 20 mm were grouped according to the extent of the mucosal defect and comparisons made between those with < 75% and ≥ 75% defects. Independent predictors of stenosis were identified.
resultsForty-seven patients had ER leaving ≥ 75% circumference defect, most located at or distal to the rectosigmoid, with ≥ 90% defects in 5 and 100% in 11. There were no significant colonic muscle injuries in patients with ≥ 75% defect and no differences in post-procedure bleeding (OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.2-13.7, p = 0.64) between patients with ≥ 75% and < 75% defects. Stenosis developed in 9 patients. ≥ 90% circumference defect was the only independent risk factor for stenosis (OR 286, p < 0.001). Three of 4 patients with asymptomatic stenosis had successful expectant management. The remainder were treated with dilatation. Recurrence was more likely in those with ≥ 75% defect (OR 7.9, 95% CI 3.8-16.4, p < 0.001) but was managed with further ER in all but 2 cases.
conclusionER of colorectal lesions resulting in defects ≥ 75% of the luminal circumference is challenging but safe and effective when performed in an expert centre. The only independent predictor of stenosis is ≥ 90% circumference defect but some patients improve with expectant management; therefore, pre-emptive intervention may not be warranted.
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.