Trial reportScientific reports2023
A new protective gel to facilitate ulcer healing in artificial ulcers following oesophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a multicentre, randomized trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hydrogels for preventing post-endoscopic submucosal dissection stenosis in early esophageal cancer: a comprehensive literature review.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are significant risks of adverse events following oesophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), such as stricture, delayed bleeding and perforation. Therefore, it is necessary to protect artificial ulcers and promote the healing process. The current study was performed to investigate the protective role of a novel gel against oesophageal ESD-associated wounds. This was a multicentre, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial that recruited participants who underwent oesophageal ESD in four hospitals in China. Participants were randomly assigned to the control or experimental group in a 1:1 ratio and the gel was used after ESD in the latter. Masking of the study group allocations was only attempted for participants. The participants were instructed to report any adverse events on post-ESD days 1, 14, and 30. Moreover, repeat endoscopy was performed at the 2-week follow-up to confirm wound healing. Among the 92 recruited patients, 81 completed the study. In the experimental group, the healing rates were significantly higher than those in the control group (83.89 ± 9.51% vs. 73.28 ± 17.81%, P = 0.0013). Participants reported no severe adverse events during the follow-up period. In conclusion, this novel gel could safely, effectively, and conveniently accelerate wound healing following oesophageal ESD. Therefore, we recommend applying this gel in daily clinical practice.
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.