Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2025
Color differences of intraprocedural bleeding between white light and red dichromatic imaging during endoscopic submucosal dissection: a post hoc analysis of a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (with videos).
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Improvement in the Visibility of Submucosal Layers and Vessels with Amber-Red Color Imaging in Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRed dichromatic imaging (RDI) is an image-enhanced endoscopy expected to improve the visibility of bleeding source. We aimed to analyze color difference and hemostasis time between white light imaging (WLI) and RDI during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD).
methodsThis was a single-center post hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to verify the efficacy and safety of RDI in hemostasis during ESD. We included patients with intraprocedural bleeding enrolled in an RCT at our institution. We extracted videos of intraoperative bleeding and annotated bleeding source in each frame. We calculated the mean color difference (ΔE) between the bleeding source and eight surrounding areas for each frame. We also evaluated the visibility score of the bleeding source.
resultsThirty-nine and 63 hemostasis were performed among 30 patients in WLI (n = 16) and RDI (n = 14) groups. The ΔE ± standard error (SE) was significantly higher in RDI than in WLI (14.2 ± 0.5 and 11.7 ± 0.8, p = 0.01). The ΔE ± SE for spurting and oozing hemorrhage was 9.3 ± 0.9 and 13.6 ± 0.7 (p = 0.02) and 12.4 ± 1.0 and 14.5 ± 0.5 (p = 0.47), and mean hemostasis time ± SE (seconds) was 44.5 ± 7.9 and 25.9 ± 3.8 (p = 0.04) in WLI and RDI, respectively. The mean visibility score was significantly higher in RDI than in WLI (3.36 ± 0.7 vs 2.78 ± 1.0, p < 0.01).
conclusionRDI demonstrated a higher color difference in the bleeding source than WLI. This could improve the visibility of a bleeding source, particularly spurting hemorrhage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40447897What 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.