Trial reportBMC gastroenterology2020
Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for small size non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: a randomized controlled trial : (UEMR vs. CEMR for small size non-pedunculated colorectal polyps).
Trial report in BMC gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03833492 (Efficacy and Safety of Underwater vs. Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for the Treatment of Diminutive Non-pedunculated Colorectal Polyps:A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Efficacy and Safety of Underwater vs. Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for the Treatment of Diminutive Non-pedunculated Colorectal Polyps:A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- EFFICACY OF WATER INFUSION VERSUS AIR/CO2 INSUFFLATION FOR COLONOSCOPY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.Arquivos de gastroenterologia · 2026Pooled it
- Different endoscopic treatments for small colorectal polyps: A systematic review, pair-wise, and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection is superior to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for medium-sized colorectal sessile polyps: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Article
- Article
- Algorithmic approach for endoscopic management of colorectal polyps: an up-to-date review.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2025Review
- Review
- Approaches and considerations in the endoscopic treatment of T1 colorectal cancer.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2024Review
- Endoscopic resection of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps: current standards of treatment.eGastroenterology · 2024Review
- Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Endoscopy international open · 2023Review
- Safety and efficacy of underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal polyps: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.Endoscopy international open · 2023Review
- Endoscopic management of colorectal polyps.Gastroenterology report · 2023Review
- Resection depth for small colorectal polyps comparing cold snare polypectomy, hot snare polypectomy and underwater endoscopic mucosal resection.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: Can it be an "Underwater" revolution?DEN open · 2022Review
- Endoscopic Mucosal Resection: Best Practices for Gastrointestinal Endoscopists.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2022Article
- Is underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of colon polyps superior to conventional techniques? A network analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection and submucosal dissection.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Review
- Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- Delayed Bleeding After Endoscopic Resection of Colorectal Polyps: Identifying High-Risk Patients.Clinical and experimental gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) is a recently developed technique and can be performed during water-aided or ordinary colonoscopy for the treatment of colorectal polyps. The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UEMR in comparison with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) of small non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.
methodsPatients with small size, non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (4-9 mm in size) who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy were enrolled in this multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups, an UEMR group and a CEMR group. Efficacy and safety were compared between groups.
resultsIn the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the complete resection rate was 83.1% (59/71) in the UEMR group and 87.3% (62/71) in the CEMR group. The en-bloc resection rate was 94.4% (67/71) in the UEMR group and 91.5% (65/71) in the CEMR group (difference 2.9%; 90% CI - 4.2 to 9.9%), showed noninferiority (noninferiority margin - 5.7% < - 4.2%). No significant difference in procedure time (81 s vs. 72 s, P = 0.183) was observed. Early bleeding was observed in 1.4% of patients in the CEMR group (1/71) and 1.4% of patients in the UEMR group (1/71). None of the patients in the UEMR group complained of postprocedural bloody stool, whereas two patients in the CEMR group (2/64) reported this adverse event.
conclusionOur results indicate that UEMR is safer and just as effective as CEMR in En-bloc resection for the treatment of small colorectal polyps as such, UEMR is recommended as an alternative approach to excising small and non-pedunculated colorectal adenomatous polyps.
trial registrationClinical Trials.gov, NCT03833492 . Retrospectively registered on February 7, 2019.
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.