ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Endoscopic full-thickness resection of colorectal lesions with the full-thickness resection device: clinical experience from two referral centers in Greece.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 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
- Colorectal Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection: A Portuguese Multicenter Experience Based on a Retrospective Cohort.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRDDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Full-thickness resection device for management of lesions involving the appendiceal orifice: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) in colon and rectum: indications and outcomes in the first 37 cases in a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Clinical guidance on endoscopic management of colonic polyps in Singapore.Singapore medical journal · 2022Article
- 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
- Paradigm shift in management of acute iatrogenic colonic perforations: 24-year retrospective comprehensive study.Endoscopy international open · 2021Article
- Dissection-enabled scaffold-assisted resection (DeSCAR): a novel technique for resection of residual or non-lifting gastrointestinal neoplasia of the colon, expanded experience and follow-up.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Combined endo-laparoscopic surgery for difficult benign colorectal polyps.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2020Review
- Hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps with a non-lifting sign: the Greek experience.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
- Emerging endoscopic resection strategies for organ preservation in early colorectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) using the full-thickness resection device (FTRD
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 17 consecutive patients treated with the FTRD
resultsTechnical success and R0 resection were achieved in 82.3% procedures (14/17) and in 87.5% of those with difficult adenomas (8 patients). In the subgroup with carcinomas (n=3), the rate of technical success and R0 resection was 66.6%, while in the subgroup with subepithelial tumors (n=6) the rate was 83.3%. Technical success and R0 resection were significantly lower for lesions >20 mm vs. ≤20 mm (P=0.0429). In the 17 patients a total of 3 adverse events occurred (17.6%) and one of the patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy because of EFTR around the appendix.
conclusionsOur study showed favorable results concerning EFTR feasibility, efficacy and safety, especially for lesions ≤20 mm, non-lifting adenomas, and subepithelial tumors. Technical success, R0 resection, and adverse events rates were comparable with previously published data. Larger randomized studies are needed to better define the clinical benefit and long-term outcomes of EFTR in selected patients.
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.