ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2024
Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy and safety of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of rectal tumors.
Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Endoscopic hand suturing after advanced endoscopic procedures: early outcomes of 31 cases in the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract (with video).Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the article was to systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the treatment of rectal tumors. Material and methods: Control studies were conducted on cases included in the electronic databases Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CNKI. Patients with colorectal tumors were included in the TEM and ESD groups for treatment, with the main indicators being R0 resection rate, postoperative perforation and bleeding incidence, and tumor recurrence rate. The meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan 5.3 software. Results: A total of 10 studies were included, with 736 patients. The analysis showed that for the recurrence rate in the TEM group compared to ESD, OR = 1.23, 95% CI = 0.56-2.72, p = 0.60; for the R0 resection rate between the TEM group and ESD group, OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 0.82-2.22, p = 0.24; for the incidence of perforation in the TEM and ESD groups, OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.25-1.40, p = 0.23. The inter-group comparison of these three items was statistically significant. Compared with the ESD group, the hospitalization time and the incidence of bleeding of the TEM group were both lower, with SD = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.26-0.69, p < 0.001 and OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.13-0.92, p = 0.03. The differences were statistically significant. Conclusions: Both TEM and ESD endoscopic treatment techniques can achieve a higher R0 resection rate and lower risk of tumor recurrence in the treatment of colorectal tumors. However, TEM may have higher surgical safety than ESD technology, and can shorten postoperative hospitalization time and lower postoperative bleeding rate.
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.