ArticleClinical endoscopy2025
Impact of contrast dye submucosal pre-lifting on cold snare resection of small polyps: an Italian randomized observational trial.
Article in Clinical 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsSmall polyps are the most frequently detected lesions during colonoscopy, with an incomplete resection rate of 6.8% to 15.9%. This study aimed to improve small polyp cold snare resection radicality using submucosal contrast dye pre-lifting (PL+CSP).
methodsThis single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the standard cold snare polypectomy technique (PL-CSP) with PL+CSP to evaluate endoscopic and histological complete resection rates, adverse events, procedural times, and polyp retrieval failure rates.
resultsIn 143 patients consecutively enrolled, 186 small polyps were detected and randomly assigned following a 1:1 ratio to the PL-CSP (n=97, 51.6%) and PL+CSP (n=90, 48.4%) techniques. Endoscopic (p=0.97) and histologic (p=0.23) complete resection rates did not differ significantly even in univariate analysis. The intraprocedural bleeding rate was significantly higher in the PL+CSP group as confirmed by the univariate analysis (35.8% vs. 8.3%, p<0.001). The polyps retrieval failure rates were similar (p=0.83). Procedural time was significantly longer for PL+CSP (median time, 75 vs. 45 seconds; p<0.001), without impacting colonoscopy withdrawal time (p=0.215).
conclusionsPL+CSP of small polyps did not improve endoscopic and histological complete resection rates and polyp sample retrieval. PL+CSP had higher rates of intraprocedural bleeding and was "time-consuming".
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.