ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology
Hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps with a non-lifting sign: the Greek experience.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility of repeat non-exposed endoscopic full-thickness resection of recurrent or residual colonic adenoma after previous full-thickness resection.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection Device (FTRDDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Emerging endoscopic resection strategies for organ preservation in early colorectal cancer.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hybrid approaches combining endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) with conventional techniques (endoscopic mucosal resection [EMR], endoscopic submucosal dissection [ESD]) have enabled the resection of difficult fibrotic colorectal adenomas exhibiting a "non-lifting" sign, and polyps in difficult positions. We present our cohort treated with either EMR+EFTR or ESD+EFTR as salvage hybrid endoscopic approaches for complex colorectal polyps not amenable to conventional techniques. Methods: Retrospective analysis included technical success, histological confirmation of margin-free resection, assessment of adverse events and follow up with histological assessment. All patients underwent follow-up endoscopy at least 6 and 12 months post-resection. Results: Fourteen patients underwent hybrid EFTR procedures (11 EMR+EFTR and 3 ESD+EFTR). Technical success was achieved in all cases where the full-thickness resection device (FTRD) was advanced to the site of the resection (100%). In 2 cases, the FTRD system could not be passed through the sigmoid colon because of severe chronic diverticulitis, subsequent fibrosis and stiffness. The mean lesion size in the EMR+EFTR group (41.7 mm; range 20-50 mm) was larger than the ESD+EFTR group (31.7 mm; range 30-35 mm). Six patients (42.9%) were histologically diagnosed with T1 carcinoma. The mean duration of hospitalization was 1.4 days. Follow-up endoscopy was available in all patients and no recurrence was observed with histological confirmation during a mean follow-up period of 15.4 months. Conclusion: Hybrid procedures appear to be safe and effective treatments for complex colorectal lesions not amenable to EMR, ESD or EFTR alone, because of the lesion size, positive non-lifting sign, and difficult positions.
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.