ArticleDEN open2024
Endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal neoplasms: Risk factors for local recurrence and long-term surveillance.
Article in DEN open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determining the optimal surgical margin using whole scene pathology and molecular surgical margin analysis in colorectal cancer radical surgery-a cross-sectional study.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Defining Optimal Surveillance Intervals Following Post-Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Usefulness of the Bridge Formation Method for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Article
- Emerging endoscopic resection strategies for organ preservation in early colorectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is an effective procedure for the en bloc resection of colorectal neoplasms. However, risk factors for local recurrence after ESD have not been identified. This study aimed to evaluate such risk factors after ESD for colorectal neoplasms. Methods: This retrospective study included 1344 patients with 1539 consecutive colorectal lesions who underwent ESD between September 2003 and December 2019. We investigated various factors associated with local recurrence in these patients. The main outcomes were the incidence of local recurrence and its relationship with clinicopathological factors during long-term surveillance. Results: The en bloc resection rate was 98.6%, the R0 resection rate was 97.2%, and the histologically complete resection rate was 92.7%. Local recurrence was observed in 7/1344 (0.5%) patients and the median follow-up period was 72 months (range 4-195 months). The incidence of local recurrence was significantly higher in lesions ≥40 mm in diameter (hazard ratio [HR] 15.68 [1.88-130.5]; Conclusions: Five risk factors for local recurrence after ESD were identified. Patients with such factors should undergo careful surveillance colonoscopy.
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.