ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2023
Multicenter evaluation of recurrence in endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection in the colon: A Western perspective.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- An Audit of Indications for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Lesions in North America: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of a novel one-step knife compared to conventional knife for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Trial
- The Current Landscape of Endoscopic Submucosal Training in the United States.Current gastroenterology reports · 2025Review
- Efficacy-cost analysis of endoscopic mucosal resection and cold snare polypectomy: A propensity score matching analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection in managing gastrointestinal tract tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile colon endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is an effective technique, removal of larger polyps often requires piecemeal resection, which can increase recurrence rates. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the colon offers the ability for
aimTo evaluate different techniques in endoscopic resection of large polyps in the colon and to identify factors for recurrence.
methodsThe study is a retrospective comparison of ESD, EMR and knife-assisted endoscopic resection performed at Stanford University Medical Center and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System between 2016 and 2020. Knife-assisted endoscopic resection was defined as use of electrosurgical knife to facilitate snare resection, such as for circumferential incision. Patients ≥ 18 years of age undergoing colonoscopy with removal of polyp(s) ≥ 20 mm were included. The primary outcome was recurrence on follow-up.
resultsA total of 376 patients and 428 polyps were included. Mean polyp size was greatest in the ESD group (35.8 mm), followed by knife-assisted endoscopic resection (33.3 mm) and EMR (30.5 mm) (
conclusionIn our study, EMR had significantly higher recurrence compared to ESD and knife-assisted endoscopic resection. We found factors including resection by 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.