Observational studyDigestive diseases and sciences2024
The Management of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Multicenter Observational Study.
Observational study in Digestive diseases and sciences, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacodynamics of direct oral anticoagulants associated with post-endoscopic delayed mucosal resection bleeding of colorectal neoplasms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Obtaining Closure? Re-evaluating Prophylactic Closure After Rectal ESD: Toward a Risk-Based Approach.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Defect closure after endoscopic submucosal dissection decreased the adverse events in patients with large rectal neoplasms: a propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Algorithmic approach for endoscopic management of colorectal polyps: an up-to-date review.Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is a lack of reports on the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) during colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).
aimsWe aimed to assess whether the use of DOACs is associated with a higher incidence of delayed bleeding (DB) after ESD.
methodsA total of 4175 colorectal neoplasms in 3515 patients were dissected at our hospitals during study period. We included 3909 lesions in the final analysis. The lesions were divided into two groups: the no-AT group (3668 neoplasms) and the DOAC group (241 neoplasms). We also compared the DOAC withdrawal group (154 neoplasms) and the DOAC continuation group (87 neoplasms).
resultsAmong the 3909 lesions, DB occurred in a total of 90 cases (2.3%). The rate of DB was 2.2% (82/3668), and 3.3% (8/241), respectively. There were no significant differences in the rate of DB between the no-AT group and the DOAC group. In the DOAC group, there were no significant differences in the rate of DB between the withdrawal group (5.2%, 8/154) and the continuation group (0%, 0/87). The multivariable analysis identified the location of the lesion in the rectum (odds ratio [OR], 4.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.614-6.242; p < 0.001) and lesions ≥ 30 mm in diameter (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 2.349-7.34; p < 0.001) as independent risk factors for DB.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that DOAC use has no significant important on the rate of DB. Prospective studies are warranted to determine whether treatment with DOACs should be interrupted prior to colorectal ESD.
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.