ArticleDEN open2025
Clinical usefulness of hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection for T1b colorectal carcinomas ≤20 mm to ensure adequate vertical margins.
Article in DEN open, 2025. 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.
- Determining the optimal surgical margin using whole scene pathology and molecular surgical margin analysis in colorectal cancer radical surgery-a cross-sectional study.Translational cancer research · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate endoscopic resection strategies for cT1b colorectal carcinomas (CRCs) ≤20 mm to determine strategies that enable adequate vertical margins (VMs). Methods: We enrolled 128 consecutive patients with cT1b colorectal carcinomas ≤20 mm resected by endoscopic mucosal resection or hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Tumor lifting conditions after submucosal injection were classified into type A (lifting, soft dome-like), type B (lifting, hard trapezoid-like), and non-lifting (positive non-lifting sign). Predictors of positive VMs (VM 1) and adequate VMs were identified. Results: All non-lifting tumors were resected by hybrid ESD and VMs were ≥500 µm. Vertical margin 1 tumors were only found in the endoscopic mucosal resection group, in which, the proportion of type B tumors with VM 1 was significantly higher than that of tumors with negative VMs ( Conclusions: Hybrid ESD can be selected for type B tumors to ensure adequate VMs.
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.