Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38062724›Full record

Trial reportThe Korean journal of internal medicine2024

Endoscopic mucosal resection using anchored snare Tip-in versus precut technique for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors.

Seung Wook Hong, Dong-Hoon Yang, Yoo Jin Lee, Dong Hoon Baek, Jaeyoung Chun, Hyun Gun Kim, Sung Joo Kim, Seung-Mo Hong, Dae-Seong Myung

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Korean journal of internal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 69% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Seung Wook HongDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Seoul, Korea.
Dong-Hoon YangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Seoul, Korea.
Yoo Jin LeeDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.
Dong Hoon BaekDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Korea.
Jaeyoung ChunDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Hyun Gun KimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Sung Joo KimDepartment of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Seung-Mo HongDepartment of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Dae-Seong MyungDepartment of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National Medical School, Gwangju, Korea.
Ulsan College · KRChonnam National University · KRKeimyung University · KRPusan National University · KRSoonchunhyang University · KRUniversity of Ulsan · KRYonsei University · KR

Funding

Korean Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Research Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsSmall rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) can be treated with modified endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). However, an optimal EMR method remains to be established. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of Tip-in EMR versus precut EMR (EMR-P) for treating rectal NETs.

methodsThis prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with rectal NETs of < 10 mm in diameter. The patients were randomly assigned to EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups in a 1:1 ratio. Primary outcome was margin-negative (R0) resection rate between the two methods, with a noninferiority margin of 10%.

resultsSeventy-five NETs in 73 patients, including 64 eligible lesions (32 lesions in each, EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups), were evaluated. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, R0 resection rates of the EMR-P and Tip-in EMR groups were 96.9% and 90.6%, respectively, which did not demonstrate non-inferiority (risk difference, -6.3 [95% confidence interval: -18.0 to 5.5]). Resection time in the EMR-P group was longer than that in the Tip-in EMR group (p < 0.001). One case of intraprocedural bleeding was reported in each group.

conclusionWe did not demonstrate the non-inferiority of Tip-in EMR compared to EMR-P for treating small rectal NETs. However, the R0 resection rates for both techniques were high enough for clinical application.

Indexed as

Endoscopic Mucosal ResectionNeuroendocrine TumorsRectal NeoplasmsHumansIntestinal MucosaProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeEndoscopic mucosal resectionMulticenter studyNeuroendocrine tumorsRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID38062724
PMCPMC10918371
OpenAlexW4389482873

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.