Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37937229›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research2023

Safety and Efficacy of Powered Non-Thermal Endoscopic Resection Device for Removal of Colonic Polyps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Zohaib Ahmed, Daryl Ramai, Nooraldin Merza, Joyce Badal, Umair Iqbal, Syeda F Arif, Alsadiq Al-Hillan, Tony Varughese, Wade Lee-Smith, Ali Nawras and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

15 authors.

Zohaib AhmedDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA.
Daryl RamaiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Nooraldin MerzaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA.
Joyce BadalUniversity of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH, USA.
Umair IqbalDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA.
Syeda F ArifDow Medical University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Alsadiq Al-HillanGastroenterology Department, Corewell Health/Willam Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, MI, USA.
Tony VarugheseDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA.
Wade Lee-SmithUniversity of Toledo Libraries, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Ali NawrasDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Yaseen AlastalDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Harshit S KharaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA.
Bradley D ConferDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA.
David L DiehlDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, PA, USA.
Douglas G AdlerCenter for Advanced Therapeutic Endoscopy, Porter Adventist Hospital, Centura Health, Denver, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection is a frequently employed method for removing colonic polyps. Nonetheless, the recurrence of these polyps over a healed submucosal base can complicate the extraction of leftover lesions through standard procedures. EndoRotor Methods: We conducted an exhaustive review of existing literature using databases such as Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until January 2023. Our aim was to find all studies that assessed the safety of non-thermal endoscopic resection devices in removing colonic polyps. The primary outcome we focused on was the rate of technical success. Secondary outcomes that we considered included the frequency of remaining lesions and instances of adverse events. To analyze these data, we used comprehensive meta-analysis software. Results: Our analysis incorporated three studies comprising 54 patients who underwent resection of 60 lesions. The combined technical success rate was 93.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 77.7-98.6%, I Conclusion: Our research indicates that the EndoRotor

Indexed as

Colonic polypsEfficiencyEndoscopic mucosal resectionMeta-analysisSafety

Identifiers

PMID37937229
PMCPMC10627355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.