Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36890416›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2023

Endoscopic mucosal resection of gastrointestinal polyps with a novel low-temperature plasma radio frequency generator: a non-inferiority multi-center randomized control study.

Ming-Yan Cai, Liang Zhu, Xiao-Yue Xu, Jia-Xin Xu, Dan-Feng Zhang, Zhen Zhang, Quan-Lin Li, Wen-Zheng Qin, Li Feng, Jian-Guang Xu and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ming-Yan Cai *Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Liang Zhu *Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Xiao-Yue Xu *Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Jia-Xin XuShanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Dan-Feng ZhangShanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Zhen ZhangShanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Quan-Lin LiShanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Wen-Zheng QinShanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China.
Li FengDepartment of Gastroenterology, Central Hospital of Minhang District, Shanghai, China.
Jian-Guang XuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Quzhou People's Hospital, Zhejiang, China.
Peng LiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Ping-Hong ZhouShanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China. zhou.pinghong@zs-hospital.sh.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-5434-0540
Fudan University · CNCapital Medical University · CNMinhang District Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of novel plasma radio frequency generator and its single-use polypectomy snares for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of gastrointestinal (GI) polyps.

methodsA total of 217 patients with 413 GI polyps were recruited from four centers in China. Patients were assigned to experimental or control groups using a central randomization method. The experimental group used the novel plasma radio frequency generator and its matched single-use polypectomy snares (Neowing, Shanghai), while the control group used the high-frequency electrosurgical unit (Erbe, Germany) and disposable electrosurgical snares (Olympus, Japan). The primary endpoint was the en bloc resection rate, and the non-inferiority margin was set at 10%. Secondary endpoint included operation time, coagulation success rate, intraoperative and postoperative bleeding rate, and perforation rate.

resultsThe en bloc resection rate was 97.20% (104/107) in the experimental group and 95.45% (105/110) in the control group (P = 0.496). The operation time was 29.14 ± 20.21 min in the experimental group and 30.26 ± 18.74 min in the control group (P = 0.671). The average removal time of a single polyp in the experimental group was 7.52 ± 4.45 min, which was slightly shorter than that in the control group 8.90 ± 6.67 min, with no statistical difference (P = 0.076). The intraoperative bleeding rates of the experimental group and control group were 8.41% (9/107) and 10.00% (11/110), respectively (P = 0.686). No intraoperative perforation occurred in either group. The postoperative bleeding rates of the experimental group and the control group were 1.87% (2/107) and 4.55% (5/110), respectively (P = 0.465). No postoperative perforation occurred in the experimental group (0/107), while one case of delayed perforation occurred in the control group (1/110, 0.91%). There was no statistical difference between the two groups.

conclusionsEndoscopic mucosal resection of GI polyps with the novel plasma radio frequency generator is safe and effective, and non-inferior to the conventional high-frequency electrosurgical system.

Indexed as

Colonic PolypsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionGastrointestinal NeoplasmsChinaColonoscopyHumansPostoperative HemorrhageTemperatureElectrosurgical unitEndoscopic mucosal resectionGastrointestinal polypsLow-temperature plasma radio frequency

Identifiers

PMID36890416
OpenAlexW4323546557

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.