ArticleDEN open2025
Endoscopic mucosal resection with an over-the-scope clip for colorectal tumors (with video).
Article in DEN open, 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
Background: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection may result in complications or may be unsuitable for tumors that are difficult to treat endoscopically. We investigated the usefulness of a newly developed endoscopic resection technique-EMR with an over-the-scope clip (EMR-O)-for difficult-to-treat lesions. Method: We retrospectively examined patients who underwent EMR-O for colorectal tumors between September 2017 and January 2024. Patient and lesion characteristics, technical success rates, en bloc resection rates, R0 resection rates, procedure time, histopathology, and the clinical course were evaluated. Results: EMR-O was performed for 18 patients. Indications for EMR-O included residual or recurrent lesions (seven patients; 38.9%), diverticulum lesions (five patients; 27.8%), appendiceal orifice lesions (three patients; 16.7%), T1 cancers (two patients; 11.1%), and subepithelial tumors (one patient; 5.5%). The median lesion size was 11 mm. The rates of technical success, en bloc resection, and R0 resection were 100%, 86.7%, and 86.7%. The median procedure time was 10 min. The only adverse event was diverticulitis (one patient; 5.5%). Intraoperative and delayed perforation and bleeding were not observed. The pathological resection depths were full-thickness for three patients (16.7%), muscularis resection for four patients (22.2%), and deep submucosal resection for 11 patients (61.1%). Conclusion: Although EMR-O is limited by the target lesion size, it shortens the procedure time, prevents perforation, and avoids the need for surgery. EMR-O may be a minimally invasive treatment option for small lesions that are difficult to treat endoscopically.
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.