ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Clinical exploration of marking targeting biopsy in the intraoperative localization value of colon polypectomy.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of an AI-Assisted System for Automatic Recognition and Localization Marking of Colonic Polyps (With Video).Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Significance of tumor markers combined with neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, D-dimer and T-lymphocyte in the diagnosis of colon cancer.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of marking targeting biopsy (MTB) in the intraoperative localization value of colon polypectomy.
methodsThe clinical data from patients with polyp of colon discovered under colonoscopy from January 2014 to January 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 87 patients conformed to the inclusion criteria, among them, 43 received colonoscopic polypectomy one week after MTB (MTB group), while 44 underwent colonoscopic polypectomy one week after conventional biopsy (conventional group). The time consumption in colonoscopic treatment, polypectomy rate and postoperative complications between two groups were compared.
resultsThe time consumed in operation in the MTB group was 25.5 (±8.6) minutes, while that in conventional group was 42.0 (±20.5) minutes, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.01). There were a total of 86 polyps in the MTB group, among which 83 were removed, yielding the removal rate of 96.5%. There were altogether 88 polyps in the conventional group, among which 54 were removed, resulting in the removal rate of 61.4%, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). three polyps in the MTB group were detached after MTB, or the wound surface became flat after gross polyp removal, and no polypectomy was required, but the marking targeting solution was clearly visible. two respective polyps in 12 cases in conventional group could not be found in colonoscopic treatment, and 10 of them had respective one polyp that could not be found again. 12 cases in MTB group suffered from abdominal pain after surgery, and no hemorrhage was seen intraoperatively and postoperatively. 10 cases in the conventional group had abdominal pain after surgery, and one case had delayed hemorrhage after surgery. The results between two groups displayed no statistical significance (P>0.05).
conclusionsThe localization value of MTB in colon polypectomy is definitely feasible, safe and effective, which can greatly shorten the time of endoscopic colon polypectomy, mitigate patient sufferings, and reduce the incidence of false negative rate of polyp. It displays favorable clinical application value and is worthy of being promoted in clinic.
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.