ArticleSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
Technique, sedation, and clinical outcome of endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal tumor with involvement of dentate line: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for the treatment of rectal tumors extending to the dentate line: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Pooled it
- The Effectiveness and Safety of Endoscopic Intermuscular Dissection for the Treatment of Rectal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Pilot Feasibility Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- [Management of Colorectal Subepithelial Lesions: Differential Diagnosis and Follow-up].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of rectal tumors involving the dentate line (RT-DL) is challenging because of the anatomical features of the anal canal. This study aimed to identify optimal techniques and sedation and to determine the clinical outcomes of ESD for RT-DL. Methods: We retrospectively collected medical records and endoscopic results of patients who underwent ESD for rectal tumors between January 2012 and April 2021. Patients were divided into RT-DL and rectal tumors not involving the dentate line (RT-NDL) groups, as per involvement of the dentate line. The treatment results and clinical outcomes of the two groups were evaluated and analyzed. Additionally, subgroup analysis was performed in the RT-DL group for the sedation method involved. Results: In total, 225 patients were enrolled and 22 were assigned to the RT-DL group. The complete resection rate (90.9% vs. 95.6%, P =0.336), delayed bleeding (13.6% vs. 5.9%, P =0.084), perforation (0% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.343), hospital stays (4.55 vs. 4.48 days, P = 0.869), and recurrence (0% vs. 0.5%) showed no significant group differences. However, in RT-DL group, the procedure time (78.32 vs. 51.10 min, P = 0.002) was longer and there was more perianal pain (22.7% vs. 0%, P = 0.001). The subgroup analysis revealed that deep sedation using propofol reduced perianal pain during the procedure (0/14 vs. 5/8, P = 0.002). Conclusions: ESD of RT-DL is a safe and effective treatment despite the challenges of requiring a high level of technique and longer procedure time. In particular, ESD under deep sedation should be considered in patients with RT-DL to control perianal pain.
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.