ArticleDigestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Risk Prediction of Post-Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Coagulation Syndrome.
Article in Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Factors of Post-ESD Electrocoagulation Syndrome for Colorectal Neoplasms: A Systematic Review and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Pooled it
- The Effect of Nexpowder in Reducing Post-ESD Coagulation Syndrome in Proximal Colon Lesions: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a predictive scoring model for post-ESD coagulation syndrome in elderly with colorectal LSTs.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Innovative development and validation of a scoring system for predicting electrocoagulation syndrome post-endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Post-electrocoagulation Syndrome Following APC Treatment for Angiodysplasia in the Ascending Colon.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been popular worldwide to treat laterally spreading tumors and large polyps. Post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS) is more common than the two major ESD-related complications, perforation, and bleeding. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of PECS, identify the risk factors for PECS, and create a risk prediction model for PECS.
methodsRetrospective cross-sectional study analyzed a total of 986 patients who underwent colorectal ESD. Logistic regression models were used to assess risk factors with PECS. Each risk factor was scored, and the 3-step risk stratification index of prediction model was assessed.
resultsThe prevalence of PECS was 21.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 18.9-24.1%). The risk factors of PECS in the multivariate logistic regression were tumor size (+1 cm: odds ratio [OR], 1.29; 95% CI, 1.16-7.09), cecal lesion (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.09-1.53), procedure time (+30 min: OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.39), and ESD with snaring (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.95). Applying a simplified weighted scoring system based on adjusted OR increments of 1, the risk of PECS was 12.3% (95% CI, 0.3-16.0%) for the low-risk group (score ≤4) and was 36.0% (95% CI = 29.4-43.2%) for the high-risk group (score ≥8). Overall discrimination (C-statistic = 0.629; 95% CI = 0.585-0.672) and calibration (p = 0.993) of the model were moderate to good.
conclusionPECS occurs frequently, and the prediction model can be helpful for effective treatment and prevention of PECS.
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.