ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Retrospective study comparing rectal endoscopic submucosal dissection with and without Foley catheter drainage tube placement.
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 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.
- Set-up and use of the "Asclepius tube": a slim drainage tube to facilitate saline-immersion endoscopic submucosal dissection.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a minimally invasive and effective treatment for rectal tumors but maintaining a clear surgical field during the procedure is challenging, especially for novice operators. This study aimed to investigate whether continuous drainage using a Foley catheter could enhance efficiency and safety of rectal ESD performed by novice endoscopists under expert supervision. Patients and methods: This retrospective study involved 26 patients who underwent rectal ESD between March 2023 and October 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received continuous drainage with Foley catheter placement (n = 12) and those who did not (n = 14). Key outcomes evaluated were dissection speed, total procedure time, R0 resection rates (complete tumor resection with clear margins), and occurrence of any adverse events (AEs) during or after the procedure. All procedures were performed by novice endoscopists under expert guidance. Results: The results showed that dissection speed was significantly higher in the Foley catheter group, with a median of 18.6 mm²/min compared with 10.5 mm²/min in the non-catheter group ( Conclusions: Foley catheter placement notably improved efficiency of rectal ESD performed by novice endoscopists, particularly by increasing dissection speed. This technique may contribute to safer and more effective ESD. However, larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and further assess their benefits.
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.