ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2025
Unsuspected efficacy of starch-based polysaccharide
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), submucosal lifting agents such as crystalloid-oil emulsion solution (COES) are used for improved effect. Starch-based polysaccharide solution (SPS), which in powder form acts as effective hemostatic agent, are now available as an alternative lifting agent.
aimTo compare SPS to COES outcomes as lifting agents in colonic EMR and ESD.
methodsThis is a retrospective study of patients who underwent colonic EMR or ESD and received submucosal injection of either SPS or COES at a single academic center from March 2021 to November 2023. A total of 79 patients were included in the COES group and 99 patients in the SPS group from chart review. Intraprocedural bleeding was defined as bleeding during a procedure requiring hemostatic intervention. Adverse events included were perforation or post-procedure gastrointestinal bleed within the first 30-day period. Data were analyzed using
resultsSuccessful resection was achieved in all 178 patients. Average lesion size in SPS group was 2.6 cm
conclusionSPS colonic submucosal injection appears to be beneficial over COES, as it is associated with lower intraprocedural bleeding, less adverse events, shorter procedures, and more frequent
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.