Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38102514›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2023

Safety, feasibility, and short-term-outcome of anal endoscopic submucosal dissection for anal intraepithelial neoplasia: an option for focal lesions?

F Singhartinger, A Gantschnigg, J Holzinger, A Wagner, J Singhartinger, O Koch, K Emmanuel, J Presl

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

F SinghartingerDepartment for Surgery, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. f.singhartinger@salk.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1149-7633
A GantschniggDepartment for Surgery, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
J HolzingerDepartment for Surgery, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
A WagnerDepartment for Internal Medicine 1, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
J SinghartingerDepartment for Gynecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany.
O KochDepartment for Surgery, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
K EmmanuelDepartment for Surgery, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
J PreslDepartment for Surgery, University Hospital Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Unfallkrankenhaus Salzburg · ATLöwenstein Medical (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) appears in three different stages. AIN 1 and AIN 2 (p16 negative) are defined as low risk and unlikely to progress to invasive anal cancer. AIN 2 (p16 positive) and AIN 3 are of high risk and should be treated because progression rates to anal cancer are around 10% and treatment significantly reduces this risk. The correct treatment is still a matter of debate. Human papilloma virus (HPV) plays a role in the development of AIN. Our aim was to assess anal endoscopic dissection (aESD) as an intervention for AIN3.

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent aESD for AIN 3 between December 2017 and March 2023. The interventional technique itself (duration, complications, size of specimen) and patient outcomes (recurrence, progression to anal cancer, re-intervention) were analyzed.

resultsFifteen patients with a median age of 52 years (23-78) underwent aESD for AIN 3. All tested specimens were positive for HPV. Median duration of intervention was 56.1 min, one delayed postinterventional bleeding occurred, and specimen size was 12.05 cm

conclusionsAnal endoscopic submucosal dissection seems to be a safe and feasible treatment for AIN. Recurrences are seldom and can be treated again with the same method. Nevertheless, indications for resection in comparison to radiofrequency ablation, pharmacological therapy, and watch-and-wait strategy are still unclear.

trial registrationEthics commission of Salzburg, Austria, EK-Nr. 1056/2023. Keywords: Endoscopic submucosal dissection, anal intraepithelial neoplasia, anal cancer.

Indexed as

Anus NeoplasmsCarcinoma in SituEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionPapillomavirus InfectionsAdultAgedFeasibility StudiesHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultAnal cancerAnal intraepithelial neoplasiaEndoscopic submucosal dissection

Identifiers

PMID38102514
PMCPMC10724311
OpenAlexW4389777600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.