ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Efficacy of water pressure method for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: Propensity-score matching analysis.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical Outcomes of Underwater Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Duodenal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Underwater Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Tips and Tricks.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Endoscopic submucosal dissection for early cancer using the water pressure method in the remnant rectum after Hartmann's procedure.Endoscopy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Technical difficulty of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for colorectal neoplasms has not been resolved. The water pressure method (WPM) is a helpful technique for overcome difficulties with colorectal ESD. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ESD with WPM (WPM-ESD) for colorectal neoplasms compared with conventional ESD (C-ESD). Patients and methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, observational study. Three hundred and eleven colorectal lesions were allocated into the WPM-ESD and the C-ESD groups, which were compared before and after propensity score matching. The main outcomes were procedure time, proportion of R0 resection, and incidence of adverse events (AEs) in the two groups. Results: The WPM-ESD and C-ESD groups were allocated 134 and 177 lesions, respectively, and propensity score matching analysis created 92 matched pairs. Mean procedure time was significantly shorter in the WPM-ESD group (49 ± 26 vs. 58 ± 42 min, Conclusions: WPM for colorectal ESD may shorten procedure time compared with C-ESD without increasing AEs.
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.