Trial reportInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Efficacy of a novel one-step knife compared to conventional knife for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in International journal of colorectal disease, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFor the treatment of advanced colorectal neoplasms, colon endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a crucial technique, although it is time-consuming. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a recently developed one-step knife (OSK) in colon ESD and compare its performance with that of a conventional knife (CK).
methodsBetween July 2020 and November 2021, patients scheduled to undergo colorectal ESD were randomly assigned to either the OSK group or the CK group. The primary outcome was the total submucosal injection time. Additionally, total procedure time, treatment outcomes, adverse events, and operator convenience were analyzed.
resultsData from 53 patients (28 in the OSK group and 25 in the CK group) were analyzed. The mean total injection time was lower in the OSK group than in the CK group (186 s [IQR, 116.8-249.5] vs. 265 s [IQR, 130.5-553.0]), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.082). The total procedure time tended to be shorter in the OSK group than in the CK group (15.5 min [IQR, 11.3-22.8] vs. 20 min [IQR, 13.5-42.5], P = 0.110). Resection rates and adverse events did not differ between the two groups. A greater proportion of endoscopists expressed high satisfaction with the OSK, particularly regarding submucosal injection.
conclusionCompared to the CK, OSK use led to shorter injection and procedure times, though not statistically significant. The use of this newly developed endoscopic knife can potentially enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of colorectal ESD (Clinical Research Information Service: KCT0005123).
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.