Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36228648›Full record

ArticleEndoscopy2023

Low risk of local recurrence after a successful en bloc endoscopic submucosal dissection for noninvasive colorectal lesions with positive horizontal resection margins (R-ESD study).

Krijn J C Haasnoot, Francisco Baldaque-Silva, Arjun Koch, Mariana Figueiredo Ferreira, João Santos-Antunes, Emanuel Dias, Masami Omae, Laurelle van Tilburg, Hao Dang, Arnaud Lemmers and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Krijn J C HaasnootDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8581-7906
Francisco Baldaque-SilvaEndoscopy Unit, Center for Upper Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital and Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0631-1945
Arjun KochDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Mariana Figueiredo FerreiraDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatopancreatology and Digestive Oncology, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
João Santos-AntunesDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Center of São João, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0614-0576
Emanuel DiasDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Center of São João, Porto, Portugal.
Masami OmaeEndoscopy Unit, Center for Upper Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital and Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Laurelle van TilburgDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1341-0044
Hao DangDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5502-4980
Arnaud LemmersDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatopancreatology and Digestive Oncology, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6256-0167
Jurjen J BoonstraDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leon M G MoonsDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC Cancer Institute · NLKarolinska University Hospital · SELeiden University Medical Center · NLUniversité Libre de Bruxelles · BEUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLHospital de São João · PTUniversidade do Porto · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), the normal mucosa is cut under constant optical control. We studied whether a positive horizontal resection margin after a complete en bloc ESD predicts local recurrence.

methodsIn this European multicenter cohort study, patients with a complete en bloc colorectal ESD were selected from prospective registries. Cases were defined by a horizontal resection margin that was positive or indeterminate for dysplasia (HM1), whereas controls had a free resection margin (HM0). Low risk lesions with submucosal invasion (T1) and margins free of carcinoma were analyzed separately. The main outcome was local recurrence.

resultsFrom 928 consecutive ESDs (2011-2020), 354 patients (40 % female; mean age 67 years, median follow-up 23.6 months), with 308 noninvasive lesions and 46 T1 lesions, were included. The recurrence rate for noninvasive lesions was 1/212 (0.5 %; 95 %CI 0.02 %-2.6 %) for HM0 vs. 2/96 (2.1 %; 95 %CI 0.57 %-7.3 %) for HM1. The recurrence rate for T1 lesions was 1/38 (2.6 %; 95 %CI 0.14 %-13.5 %) for HM0 vs. 2/8 (25 %; 95 %CI 7.2 %-59.1 %) for HM1.

conclusionA positive horizontal resection margin after an en bloc ESD for noninvasive lesions is associated with a marginal nonsignificant increase in the local recurrence rate, equal to an ESD with clear horizontal margins. This could not be confirmed for T1 lesions.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMargins of ExcisionNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36228648
PMCPMC9974332
OpenAlexW4306147622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.