ReviewCancers2022
Long-Term Outcomes of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Epithelial Neoplasms: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of the timing of additional surgery after noncurative endoscopic resection of early colorectal cancer on perioperative and oncological outcomes: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- Comparison of Traction and Pocket Creation Methods for Facilitating Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- A predictive nomogram for hemorrhage risk following endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastrointestinal tumors: a retrospective cohort study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in colonoscopy: Enhancing quality indicators for optimal patient outcomes.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Endoscopic submucosal dissection, transanal endoscopic microsurgical submucosal dissection, and transanal minimally invasive surgery in rectal lesions.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Salvage Surgery After Non-Curative Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Colorectal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Long-Term Follow-Up After Non-Curative Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastrointestinal Cancer-A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Weighing the benefits of lymphadenectomy in early-stage colorectal cancer.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Review
- Transanal minimally invasive surgery for benign and malignant rectal lesions: midterm outcomes from a tertiary center.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review, we summarize up-to-date reports with five-year observation after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Five-year cause-specific survival rates ranged from 98.6 to 100%. The local recurrence rates ranged from 1.1 to 2.2% in complete resection and 7.5 to 25.0% in incomplete resection. Incomplete resection was a risk factor for local recurrence. In non-curative ESD, five-year cause-specific survival rates ranged from 93.8 to 100% with additional surgery, and 92.7 to 99.1% without surgery. The choice of additional surgery should be based on the individual patient's age, concomitant diseases, wishes, life expectancy, and the risk of lymph node metastasis. The metachronous cancer rates ranged from 0.22 to 1.1%. Both local recurrence and metachronous tumors should be checked with a follow-up colonoscopy after ESD.
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.