Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40109311›Full record

ArticleEndoscopy international open2025

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for proximal colonic lesions: An effective therapeutic option.

Ludovico Alfarone, Roberta Maselli, Cesare Hassan, Paola Spaggiari, Marco Spadaccini, Antonio Capogreco, Davide Massimi, Roberto De Sire, Elisabetta Mastrorocco, Alessandro Repici

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ludovico AlfaroneEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Roberta MaselliEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Cesare HassanEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7167-1459
Paola SpaggiariPathology Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Marco SpadacciniEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Antonio CapogrecoEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2212-2266
Davide MassimiEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Roberto De SireEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Elisabetta MastroroccoEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.ORCID 0009-0009-3933-5733
Alessandro RepiciEndoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and study aims: Due to the greater risks of adverse events (AEs) and the lower rate of submucosal invasive cancer (SMIC), large proximal colonic polyps are frequently treated by piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in the West. However, this implies the risk of surgery to radicalize non-curative endoscopic resection in case of early colorectal cancer (CRC). We evaluated procedure outcomes in patients undergoing ESD for proximal colonic lesions at risk of SMIC. Patients and methods: All consecutive patients with lesions at risk of SMIC proximal to splenic flexure referred for ESD at a tertiary center were prospectively included from 2019 to 2021. En bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were primary outcomes, while length of hospitalization, AEs, need for surgery due to AEs, and recurrence rates were secondary outcomes. Results: A total of 116 patients (mean age: 68.4±10.91 years; men: 69.8%) were included. En bloc, R0, and curative resection rates were 84.5%, 78.4%, and 72.4%, respectively. T1 adenocarcinoma was reported in 25% of lesions (29/116). Eleven patients (9.5%) underwent secondary surgery due to non-curative resections; residual disease was found in one patient. Most frequent AE was intra-procedural perforation (9.9%); no AE required surgery. Median follow-up was 36 months; three of 97 recurrences (3.1%) at 6 months and one of 85 recurrence (1.2%) at 36 months were reported, which were all endoscopically treated. Conclusions: In expert hands, ESD is effective and safe for proximal colonic lesions at risk of SMIC for the favorable balance between risk of AEs and benefit of avoiding unnecessary surgery, even for early CRC.

Indexed as

Colorectal cancerEndoscopic resection (polypectomy, ESD, EMRc, ...)Endoscopy Lower GI TractPolyps / adenomas / ...

Identifiers

PMID40109311
PMCPMC11922310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.