ArticleClinical endoscopy2021
Underwater Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for 10 mm or Larger Nonpedunculated Colorectal Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Underwater versus conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Pooled it
- UnderwaterWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Resection for Superficial Non-Ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors.Gut and liver · 2025Review
- New chapter in precision medicine: strategies for endoscopic resection of 10-20 mm non-pedunculated colorectal polyps.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Water-assisted colonoscopy in inflammatory bowel diseases: From technical implications to diagnostic and therapeutic potentials.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2024Review
- Underwater Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Colorectal Laterally Spreading Tumors: A Post Hoc Analysis of Efficacy.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Article
- Safety and effectiveness of underwater cold snare resection without submucosal injection of large non-pedunculated colorectal lesions.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsRecent studies have reported the favorable outcomes of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) for colorectal polyps. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy and safety of UEMR for nonpedunculated polyps ≥10 mm.
methodsWe performed a comprehensive search of multiple databases (through May 2020) to identify studies reporting the outcomes of UEMR for ≥10 mm nonpedunculated colorectal polyps. The assessed outcomes were recurrence rate on the first follow-up, en bloc resection, incomplete resection, and adverse events after UEMR.
resultsA total of 1276 polyps from 16 articles were included in our study. The recurrence rate was 7.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3-12) and 5.9% (95% CI, 3.6-9.4) for nonpedunculated polyps ≥10 and ≥20 mm, respectively. For nonpedunculated polyps ≥10 mm, the en bloc resection, R0 resection, and incomplete resection rates were 57.7% (95% CI, 42.4-71.6), 58.9% (95% CI, 42.4-73.6), and 1.5% (95% CI, 0.8-2.6), respectively. The rates of pooled adverse events, intraprocedural bleeding, and delayed bleeding were 7.0%, 5.4%, and 2.9%, respectively. The rate of perforation and postpolypectomy syndrome was 0.8%.
conclusionOur systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that UEMR for nonpedunculated colorectal polyps ≥10 mm is safe and effective with a low rate of recurrence.
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.