Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31932934›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

Feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasia at anastomotic sites: a retrospective study.

Tadateru Maehata, Motohiko Kato, Yasutoshi Ochiai, Mari Mizutani, Koshiro Tsutsumi, Yoshiyuki Kiguchi, Teppei Akimoto, Motoki Sasaki, Yusaku Takatori, Atsushi Nakayama and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. EMR/ESD: Techniques, Complications, and Evidence.Current gastroenterology reports · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tadateru MaehataDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan. t2maehata@keio.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4279-0138
Motohiko KatoDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Yasutoshi OchiaiDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Mari MizutaniDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Koshiro TsutsumiDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Yoshiyuki KiguchiDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Teppei AkimotoDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Motoki SasakiDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Yusaku TakatoriDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Atsushi NakayamaDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Kaoru TakabayashiCenter for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy, School of Medicine, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan.
Ai FujimotoDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization, Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Osamu GotoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.
Naohisa YahagiDivision of Research and Development for Minimally Invasive Treatment, Cancer Center, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan.
Keio University · JPNippon Medical School · JPTokyo Medical Center · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMetachronous colorectal lesions sometimes occur at anastomotic sites following colorectal surgery, which increases the risk of developing colorectal cancer. However, these lesions are difficult to treat even with minimally invasive methods such as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Thus, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ESD for colorectal lesions at anastomotic sites following colorectal surgery.

methodsWe retrospectively investigated 11 patients with post-surgical colorectal lesions at anastomotic sites who later underwent ESD from May 2010 to April 2019 at Keio University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. We examined the patients' background (tumor location, macroscopic type, tumor size, histological type, and depth of invasion) and treatment outcomes (procedure duration, en bloc resection rate, R0 resection rate, and adverse events).

resultsThe patients' mean age was 66 years. There were two lesions in the transverse colon, six in the rectum, one in the anal canal, and two in the ileal pouch. The median tumor size was 25 mm. The macroscopic types were the protruded type (1 lesion) and the flat or depressed type (10 lesions). The pathological diagnoses were adenoma (4 lesions), intramucosal cancer (corresponding to high-grade dysplasia) (6 lesions), and muscularis propria cancer (1 lesion). The median procedure duration was 50 min; en bloc resection rate was 88.9% and R0 resection rate was 66.7%. The only adverse event was delayed post-ESD bleeding.

conclusionsA high en bloc resection rate without perforation was achieved with ESD for lesions at anastomotic sites. Although ESD for lesions at anastomotic sites is a technically challenging procedure because of severe submucosal fibrosis, this approach could prevent the need for repeated surgical resection.

Indexed as

AgedAnastomosis, SurgicalColorectal NeoplasmsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnastomotic siteColorectal lesionsEndoscopic submucosal dissection

Identifiers

PMID31932934
OpenAlexW2999525225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.