ArticleClinical endoscopy2025
Long-term outcome of grade 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumor ≤1 cm after incomplete endoscopic resection.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting Remnant Tumor After Incomplete Resection of Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: The KASID Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Observational
- Beyond technique: toward strategy-based endoscopic resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Modified Double-snare-assisted Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumours: A Preliminary Study.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurveillance strategies for small grade 1 rectal neuroendocrine tumors (G1 rNETs) after incomplete endoscopic resection (ER) remain controversial. We evaluated the long-term outcomes of patients with G1 rNET ≤1 cm after ER who did and did not undergo complete resection.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 441 patients with G1 rNETs measuring ≤1 cm after ER between 2011 and 2022. Patients were divided into complete and incomplete resection groups according to histopathological evaluation. Logistic regression analysis identified the risk factors for incomplete resection after ER.
resultsThe mean follow-up intervals were 38.6 and 45.7 months in all patients and the incomplete resection group, respectively. No recurrences were observed during the follow-up period. The mean lesion size was 5.5 mm and the complete resection rate was 80.5% (n=355). In the logistic regression analysis, lesion size 5.1 to 10 mm (odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.245-4.203; p=0.008), multiple lesions (OR, 8.3; 95% CI, 1.247-54.774; p=0.029), and retroflexion view during the procedure (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.668-9.615; p=0.002) were independent risk factors for incomplete resection.
conclusionsThe prognosis of G1 rNET ≤1 cm after ER was very good, regardless of the histopathological results.
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.