Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37799128›Full record

ArticleTechniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy2023

Closure of Mucosal Defects Using Endoscopic Suturing Following Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Single-Center Experience.

Osman Ali, Andrew Canakis, Yuting Huang, Harsh Patel, Madeline Alizadeh, Raymond E Kim

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques and innovations in gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Osman AliDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Andrew CanakisDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Yuting HuangDepartment of Medicine, University of Maryland Medical Center Midtown Campus, Baltimore, MD.
Harsh PatelDepartment of Medicine, University of Maryland Medical Center Midtown Campus, Baltimore, MD.
Madeline AlizadehDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Raymond E KimDivision of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
University of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

Research Training in Gastroenterology and HepatologyT32DK067872 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI RAUFMAN, JEAN-PIERRE · 2005 to 2024
$7.2M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK067872
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a therapeutic technique for en-bloc resection of both large (>20 mm) and smaller, complex gastrointestinal neoplasms. ESD has a higher success rate of en-bloc resection and a lower rate of local recurrence compared to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). Removal of lesions via ESD can leave large mucosal defects, raising unique challenges leading to adverse events. We aimed to determine clinical outcomes including delayed bleeding, perforation and hospitalization in patients undergoing endoscopic suturing following ESD. Methods: Single-center retrospective study of a prospectively collected database of consecutive adult patients who underwent ESD with mucosal defect closure using endoscopic suturing. Primary outcomes were adverse events, specifically, delayed bleeding or perforation. Secondary outcomes included need for hospitalization and suturing complications. Results: 55 patients (mean age: 67 years) were included with a mean lesion size of 27.4 mm ± 15. Defect closure occurred in the esophagus (6), gastroesophageal junction (2), stomach (30), cecum (2), sigmoid colon (2) and rectum (13). A mean of 1.8 ± 1.0 sutures were required for defect closure. Hospital admission rates were 14% (8/55) with an average length of stay 2 days (range: 1-3 days). Intra-procedure perforation occurred in two patients and both were successfully treated with endoscopic suturing. There was one case of delayed bleeding and no cases of delayed perforation or suturing complications. Conclusion: The use of endoscopic suturing following ESD is a safe and clinically reliable method to close mucosal defects. This approach is associated with minimal adverse events and need for hospitalization. Larger studies are needed to further validate these findings.

Indexed as

ClosureEndoscopic Submucosal DissectionPerforationSuturing

Identifiers

PMID37799128
PMCPMC10552729
OpenAlexW4308922195

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.