ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Histological prediction and choice of the best resection strategy in front of a colorectal lesion > 2 cm: prospective comparison of endoscopic characterization, non-targeted and targeted biopsies.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate endoscopic characterization of colorectal lesions is essential to predict histology and select the best treatment strategy but remains very difficult. Instead of the recommended endoscopic characterization, many gastroenterologists routinely perform biopsies of the lesion to propose endoscopic resection with or without R0 intent. The aim of this study was to determine which of endoscopic characterization or biopsies, either targeted (TB) or non-targeted (NTB), is the most effective to determine the best treatment strategy for colorectal neoplasia > 2 cm.
methodsWe prospectively assessed the best strategy between endoscopic characterization and targeted or non-targeted biopsies, so that the proposed resection technique offered a level of quality of tumor resection adapted to the definitive histology of the lesion on R0-resected specimen.
results84 patients with 88 lesions were included. "Adequate treatment" was proposed by endoscopic characterization in 52.3 to 70.5% of cases, "under treatment" in 2.3 to 9.1% and "over treatment" in 20.5 to 45.5%. Two severe events were recorded. "Adequate treatment" was proposed by TB and NTB in respectively 72.7 and 69.3% of cases, "under treatment" in respectively 27.3 and 30.7% and no case of "over treatment" was reported. TB and NTB were ineffective to evaluate the depth of invasion in the submucosa and to differentiate superficial invasive from deep invasive adenocarcinomas.
conclusionsBiopsies-based strategies are unable to predict depth of cancer invasion and could be associated with a risk of under treatment of large colorectal lesions in near a third of the cases compared to only around 5% with endoscopic characterization. Endoscopic characterization could lead to over treatment, but mainly by endoscopic submucosal dissection with low morbidity. Characterization with the CONECCT classification could decrease the risk of under treatment and avoid surgeries for non-malignant colorectal lesions. Other endoscopic criteria should be determined to better characterize colorectal lesions and to improve the best adapted treatment for each lesion.
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.