ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2023
Magnifying chromoendoscopy is a reliable method in the selection of rectal neoplasms for local excision.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Korean Rectal Cancer Multidisciplinary Committee Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rectal Cancer version 2.0.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Guideline
- Does Local Excision Without Salvage Surgery Affect the Prognostic Outcome of Patients With Malignant Colorectal Polyp? A Long-Term Survival Analysis.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Case Report: S100-negative primary anorectal melanoma with elevated Ki67: a case for biology-driven radical resection despite early radiological staging.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical Tools for Rectal Cancer Response Assessment following Neoadjuvant Treatment in the Era of Organ Preservation.Cancers · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAdequate staging of early rectal neoplasms is essential for organ-preserving treatments, but magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) frequently overestimates the stage of those lesions. We aimed to compare the ability of magnifying chromoendoscopy and MRI to select patients with early rectal neoplasms for local excision.
methodsThis retrospective study in a tertiary Western cancer center included consecutive patients evaluated by magnifying chromoendoscopy and MRI who underwent en bloc resection of nonpedunculated sessile polyps larger than 20 mm, laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) [Formula: see text] 20 mm, or depressed-type lesions of any size (Paris 0-IIc). Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of magnifying chromoendoscopy and MRI to determine which lesions were amenable to local excision (i.e., [Formula: see text] T1sm1) were calculated.
resultsSpecificity of magnifying chromoendoscopy was 97.3% (95% CI 92.2-99.4), and accuracy was 92.7% (95% CI 86.7-96.6) for predicting invasion deeper than T1sm1 (not amenable to local excision). MRI had lower specificity (60.5%, 95% CI 43.4-76.0) and lower accuracy (58.3%, 95% CI 43.2-72.4). Magnifying chromoendoscopy incorrectly predicted invasion depth in 10.7% of the cases in which the MRI was correct, while magnifying chromoendoscopy provided a correct diagnosis in 90% of the cases in which the MRI was incorrect (p = 0.001). Overstaging occurred in 33.3% of the cases in which magnifying chromoendoscopy was incorrect and 75% of the cases in which MRI was incorrect.
conclusionMagnifying chromoendoscopy is reliable for predicting invasion depth in early rectal neoplasms and selecting patients for local excision.
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.