ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2019
Usefulness of 3-Dimensional Flexible Endoscopy in Esophageal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in an
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving Operator Depth Vision in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Pilot Study of a New Three-dimensional Imaging System.DEN open · 2026Article
- Review
- Three-dimensional flexible endoscopy enables more accurate endoscopic recognition and endoscopic submucosal dissection marking for superficial gastric neoplasia: a pilot study to compare two- and three-dimensional imaging.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Advances in optical gastrointestinal endoscopy: a technical review.Molecular oncology · 2021Review
- Three-dimensional visualization improves the endoscopic diagnosis of superficial gastric neoplasia.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThree-dimensional (3D) rigid endoscopy has been clinically introduced in surgical fields to enable safer and more accurate procedures. To explore the feasibility of 3D flexible endoscopy, we conducted a study comparing 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D visions for the performance of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).
methodsSix endoscopists (3 experts and 3 trainees) performed ESD of target lesions in isolated porcine esophagus using a prototype 3D flexible endoscope under 2D or 3D vision. Study endpoints were procedure time, speed of mucosal incision and submucosal dissection, number of technical adverse events (perforation, muscle layer damage, and sample damage), and degree of sense of security, fatigue, and eye strain.
resultsProcedure time and speed of mucosal incision/submucosal dissection were equivalent for 2D and 3D visions in both experts and trainees. The number of technical adverse events using 2D vision (mean [standard deviation], 3.5 [4.09]) tended to be higher than that using 3D vision in trainees (1.33 [2.80];
conclusions3D vision improves the sense of security during ESD and may reduce technical errors, especially in trainees, indicating the feasibility of a clinical trial of ESD under 3D vision.
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.