Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36266483›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2023

Efficacy of lidocaine injection method for esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection: single-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

Tetsuya Yoshizaki, Masanori Matsumoto, Tomoya Sako, Yuzo Kodama, Akihiko Okada

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Submucosal Lidocaine Injection in Colonic Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Single-Center, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tetsuya YoshizakiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-2 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan. yoshizak@med.kobe-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4315-4766
Masanori MatsumotoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Tomoya SakoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Yuzo KodamaDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-2 Kusunoki-Cho, Chuo-Ku, Kobe, Hyogo, 650-0017, Japan.
Akihiko OkadaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital, Osaka, Japan.
Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital · JPKobe University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraoperative body movements are one of the causes of difficulty in performing esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) under conscious sedation. The use of local anesthetics as local injection materials during ESD may overcome this difficulty. We clinically evaluated the lidocaine injection method (LIM) in the submucosa during esophageal ESD.

methodsThis was a single-center, prospective, double-blind, randomized trial. Patients who underwent esophageal ESD under conscious sedation from June 2018 to May 2021 were included in this study. In the LIM group, lidocaine was used for submucosal injection during ESD; in the control group, ESD was performed without lidocaine. The primary outcome was the presence of body movements.

resultsFifty patients were enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio in two groups. The incidence of body movements was significantly lower in the LIM group (12% [3/25]) than in the control group (48% [12/25]; P = 0.01). The median additional dose of midazolam was 2 mg (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.5-4 mg) in the LIM group and 4 mg (IQR: 3-6 mg) in the control group, which was significantly lower in the LIM group (P < 0.01). The median visual analog scale score for endoscopist satisfaction was 7 (IQR: 5-8) in the LIM group and 5 (IQR: 4-6.5) in the control group, which was significantly higher in the LIM group.

conclusionsLIM during esophageal ESD reduced body movements while decreasing the level of sedation. Therefore, LIM during esophageal ESD is an option for maintaining good sedation (UMIN000032804).

Indexed as

Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionEsophageal NeoplasmsDouble-Blind MethodEsophagusHumansLidocaineMidazolamProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLidocaineMidazolamEndoscopyEsophagusInjectionLidocaineSedation

Identifiers

PMID36266483
OpenAlexW4306950410

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.