Observational studySurgical endoscopy2022
Effects of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection on postoperative abdominal symptoms: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut frailty in chronic heart failure: clinical determinants and distinct microbial signatures.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- A triple-masked, two-center, randomized parallel clinical trial to assess the superiority of eight weeks of grape seed flour supplementation against placebo for weight loss attenuation during perioperative period in patients with cachexia associated with colorectal cancer: a study protocol.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Assessment of BNP and BDNF results in elective endovascular cerebral aneurysm treatment.Irish journal of medical science · 2022Article
- Endoscopic Management of Complex Colorectal Polyps: Current Insights and Future Trends.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective procedure to resect large superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms. In gastric ESD, several studies showed the relationship between postoperative abdominal symptoms and endoscopic treatment. However, the influence of colorectal ESD on abdominal symptoms after treatment is still unknown. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first prospective multicenter study performed to investigate the impact of colorectal ESD on postoperative abdominal symptoms. This study aimed to clarify the association between change of abdominal symptoms and ESD.
methodsThis study was a prospective multicenter observational trial that enrolled 141 out of 171 patients who underwent colorectal ESD and answered the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) questionnaire from March 2015 to August 2019. We evaluated abdominal symptoms in the patients using the GSRS questionnaire before ESD and a few weeks after ESD.
resultsComparing the GSRS before and after ESD, overall scores changed from 1.58 ± 0.58 to 1.48 ± 0.48, and the five subscales (reflux syndrome, abdominal pain, indigestion syndrome, diarrhea syndrome, and constipation syndrome) were slightly improved. Overall scores, indigestion syndrome, and constipation syndrome were statistically significantly different before and after ESD (P < 0.05).
conclusionsIn GSRS, a score of ≥ 3 is often treated as a clinically significant symptom. Therefore, our findings indicated that there was no clinically significant difference. For this reason, colorectal ESD does not affect postoperative abdominal symptoms and is considered a minimally invasive treatment. The analysis of the impact of colon ESD on gastrointestinal symptoms UMIN000016914.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33502617What 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.