ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Endoscopic closure using a dedicated device following gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: Multicenter, prospective, observational pilot study.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. 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.
- Takotsubo syndrome following delayed bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection: a case report.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Review
- Feasibility of Endoscopic Closure Method Using Low Cost Clips With Thread for Post Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Pilot Study.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Development of a simple, optimized closure method for mucosal defects left by gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is warranted. Herein, we developed a novel and dedicated closure device called FLEXLOOP and aimed to assess feasibility and safety of the closure using FLEXLOOP following gastric ESD. Patients and methods: This multicenter, prospective, observational study enrolled patients clinically diagnosed with gastric neoplasms < 30 mm in size. Following gastric ESD, closure of the mucosal defect was performed using a FLEXLOOP with standard clips. The primary outcome was the complete closure rate. The secondary outcomes were procedure time, number of clips, sustained closure rate on second-look endoscopy on postoperative days (PODs) 5 to 7, and rate of post-ESD bleeding. Results: Overall, 35 patients were included in this study. The median specimen size was 32 mm. The mucosal defect was completely closed in 31 patients (89%; 95% confidence interval, 73%-99%) and incompletely closed in four patients (11%). Median closure time was 11 minutes and median number of clips was 10. Second-look endoscopy performed on PODs 5 to 7 demonstrated sustained, partially sustained, and unsustained closures in seven (20%), 22 (63%), and six patients (17%), respectively. Post-ESD bleeding and complications related to FLEXLOOP were not observed. Conclusions: Closure using FLEXLOOP is feasible and safe. Our technique using this new device can be an attractive option for more easily closing mucosal defects. However, further clinical research is warranted to confirm that this technique can prevent delayed complications.
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.