Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32180001›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

A large multicenter cohort on the use of full-thickness resection device for difficult colonic lesions.

Y Ichkhanian, K Vosoughi, D L Diehl, I S Grimm, T W James, A W Templeton, K Hajifathalian, J L Tokar, J B Samarasena, N El Hage Chehade and 26 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRDDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Full-thickness resection: troubleshooting, tips, and tricks for success in the colorectum.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2022
    Article
  10. Prophylactic appendiceal retrograde intraluminal stent placement (PARIS).VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Evolving management of colorectal polyps.Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy
    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

36 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.

Y Ichkhanian *Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
K Vosoughi *Division of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
D L DiehlDepartment of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA.
I S GrimmDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
T W JamesDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
A W TempletonDepartment of Gastroenterology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
K HajifathalianDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
J L TokarFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
J B SamarasenaH. H. Chao Comprehensive Digestive Disease Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
N El Hage ChehadeH. H. Chao Comprehensive Digestive Disease Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
J LeeH. H. Chao Comprehensive Digestive Disease Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
K ChangH. H. Chao Comprehensive Digestive Disease Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA, USA.
M MizrahiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Center for Advanced Endoscopy, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL, USA.
M BarawiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, USA.
S IraniDigestive Disease Institute, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
S FriedlandDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
P KorcDepartment of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, Hoag Hospital, Newport Beach, CA, USA.
A A AadamDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
M A Al-HaddadDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
T E KowalskiThomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
A NovikovThomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
G SmallfieldDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
G G GinsbergGastroenterology Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
V M OzaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of South Carolina, Greenville, SC, USA.
D PanuuMcLeod Regional Medical Center, Florence, SC, USA.
N FukamiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
H PohlVA White River Junction, White River Junction, VT, USA.
Michael LajinSHARP Grossmont Hospital, La Mesa, CA, USA.
N A KumtaDr. Henry D. Janowitz Division of Gastroenterology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
S J TangDivision of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
Y M NagaDivision of Digestive Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
S K AmateauDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
G O I BrewerDivision of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
V KumbhariDivision of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
R SharaihaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Mouen A KhashabDivision of Gastroenterology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA. mkhasha1@jhmi.edu.
Johns Hopkins Hospital · USUniversity of California, Irvine · USCornell University · USThomas Jefferson University · USUniversity of Mississippi Medical Center · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USFox Chase Cancer Center · USGeisinger Medical Center · USHoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USOrlando Regional Medical Center · USRush University Medical Center · USSharp Grossmont Hospital · USStanford University · USSt. John Hospital & Medical Center · USUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USUniversity of South Alabama · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntroduction of the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) has allowed endoscopic resection of difficult lesions such as those with deep wall origin/infiltration or those located in difficult anatomic locations. The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes of the FTRD among its early users in the USA.

methodsPatients who underwent endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for lower gastrointestinal tract lesions using the FTRD at 26 US tertiary care centers between 10/2017 and 12/2018 were included. Primary outcome was R0 resection rate. Secondary outcomes included rate of technical success (en bloc resection), achievement of histologic full-thickness resection (FTR), and adverse events (AE).

resultsA total of 95 patients (mean age 65.5 ± 12.6 year, 38.9% F) were included. The most common indication, for use of FTRD, was resection of difficult adenomas (non-lifting, recurrent, residual, or involving appendiceal orifice/diverticular opening) (66.3%), followed by adenocarcinomas (22.1%), and subepithelial tumors (SET) (11.6%). Lesions were located in the proximal colon (61.1%), distal colon (18.9%), or rectum (20%). Mean lesion diameter was 15.5 ± 6.4 mm and 61.1% had a prior resection attempt. The mean total procedure time was 59.7 ± 31.8 min. R0 resection was achieved in 82.7% while technical success was achieved in 84.2%. Histologically FTR was demonstrated in 88.1% of patients. There were five clinical AE (5.3%) with 2 (2.1%) requiring surgical intervention.

conclusionsResults from this first US multicenter study suggest that EFTR with the FTRD is a technically feasible, safe, and effective technique for resecting difficult colonic lesions.

Indexed as

AdenomaAgedCohort StudiesColonic NeoplasmsEndoscopyFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeDifficult adenomasEndoscopic full-thickness resectionFTRDFull-thickness resection device

Identifiers

PMID32180001
OpenAlexW3011800272

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.