ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2025
Current status of endoscopic resection for small rectal neuroendocrine tumors.
Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Rectal neuroendocrine tumors of the rectum: update on endoscopic and surgical treatment].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Comparison of Endoscopic Therapies for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Endoscopic Muscularis Superficialis Dissection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rectal neuroendocrine tumor (rNET) is an indolent malignancy often detected during colonoscopy screening. The incidence of rNET has increased approximately 10-fold over the past 30 years. Most rNETs detected during screening endoscopy are small, measuring < 10 mm. Current guidelines recommend endoscopic resection for small, well-differentiated rNET using modified endoscopic submucosal resection (mEMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection. However, the optimal endoscopic treatment method remains uncertain. This paper summarizes the evidence on mEMR with submucosal stretching, mEMR without submucosal stretching, endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic full-thickness resection. Given that rNETs often exhibit submucosal invasion, achieving adequate resection depth is crucial to ensure histological complete resection. mEMR with submucosal stretching appears favorable due to its high rate of histological complete resection, safety and convenience. Risk factors associated with lymph node and distant metastases are also discussed. A treatment algorithm is proposed to facilitate clinical decision-making.
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.