ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2020
Underwater
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes for Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of 21-30-mm Colorectal Polyps: A Feasible Study.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Trial
- Outcomes of Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Giant Colorectal Polyps: A Multicenter Study.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- [Technical advances in endoscopic resection : Potential, limits and the necessary interdisciplinary dialogue with surgery].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Underwater hybrid ESD versus conventional ESD for colorectal laterally spreading tumors: a retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Longly-attached cap can contribute to en bloc underwater endoscopic mucosal resection of 20-30 mm colorectal intramucosal lesions.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- From advanced diagnosis to advanced resection in early neoplastic colorectal lesions: Never-ending and trending topics in the 2020s.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022Review
- Endoscopic management of difficult laterally spreading tumors in colorectum.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Review
- Review
- Modified endoscopic mucosal resection techniques for treating precancerous colorectal lesions.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) of colorectal lesions is emerging as an alternative method to conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR); however, it is still controversial whether there is a difference in the effectiveness between UEMR and EMR.
aimTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of UEMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps.
methodsClinical studies comparing the effectiveness or safety of UEMR in the treatment of colorectal polyps were searched in medical databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang Data, monographs, theses, and papers presented at conferences. Statistical analyses were performed using Revman 5.3 software.
resultsSeven non-randomized controlled trials and one randomized controlled trial met the inclusion criteria. In total, 1382 patients (1511 polyps) were included in the study, including 722 who received UEMR and 789 who received EMR. In the UEMR and EMR groups, the
conclusionUEMR is an effective technique for colorectal polyps and appears to have some advantages over EMR, particularly with regard to some treatment outcomes.
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.