Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34704150›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Training program using a traction device improves trainees' learning curve of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Yuki Mitsuyoshi, Daisuke Ide, Tomohiko Richard Ohya, Mitsuaki Ishihoka, Chihiro Yasue, Akiko Chino, Masahiro Igarashi, Akio Nakashima, Shoichi Saito, Junko Fujisaki and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yuki MitsuyoshiDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Daisuke IdeDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. dei0405@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2167-9852
Tomohiko Richard OhyaDepartment of Endoscopy, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Mitsuaki IshihokaDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Chihiro YasueDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Akiko ChinoDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Masahiro IgarashiDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Akio NakashimaDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shoichi SaitoDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Junko FujisakiDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31, Ariake, Koto, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
Masayuki SarutaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
The Cancer Institute Hospital · JPJikei University School of Medicine · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundColorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) requires advanced endoscopic skill. For safer and more reliable ESD implementation, various traction devices have been developed in recent years. The purpose of this research was to evaluate whether an ESD training program using a traction device (TD) would contribute to the improvement of trainees' skill acquisition.

methodsThe differences in treatment outcomes and learning curves by the training program were compared before and after the introduction of TD (control group: January 2014 to March 2016; TD group: April 2016 to June 2018).

resultsA total of 316 patients were included in the analysis (TD group: 202 cases; control group: 114 cases). The number of cases required to achieve proficiency in ESD techniques was 10 in the TD group and 21 in the control group. Compared to the control group, the TD group had a significant advantage in ESD self-completion rate (73.8% vs. 58.8%), dissection speed (19.5 mm

conclusionsThe rate of colorectal ESD self-completion by trainees improved immediately after the start of the training program using a traction device compared to the conventional method, and the dissection speed tended to increase linearly with ESD experience. We believe that ESD training using a traction device will help ESD techniques to be performed safely and reliably among trainees.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionDissectionHumansLearning CurveTractionTreatment OutcomeColonoscopyColorectal neoplasmsEndoscopic submucosal dissectionTraction deviceTrainee endoscopistTraining program

Identifiers

PMID34704150
OpenAlexW3211218834

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.