ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2025
Risk modeling of delayed postoperative bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early colorectal cancer and precancerous lesions.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction Models for Delayed Bleeding After Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.DEN open · 2027Review
- Development and validation of a predictive scoring model for post-ESD coagulation syndrome in elderly with colorectal LSTs.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Predicting post-ESD bleeding in elderly patients with early gastrointestinal cancer: an explainable model based on endoscopic features.Frontiers in medicine · 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
backgroundAs a minimally invasive technique, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used in treating early colorectal cancer (ECRC) and precancerous lesions (PCLs). However, a common postoperative complication - delayed postoperative bleeding (DPOB) - can significantly hinder patient recovery.
aimTo build and validate a predictive model for assessing post-ESD DPOB risk in ECRC and PCL patients, utilizing logistic regression methodology.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted on ECRC/PCL 302 patients who received ESD at our hospital between July 2021 and July 2024. The cohort was stratified based on the incidence of DPOB following ESD, forming DPOB and non-DPOB groups. Through allocation, they were further allocated into model and validation cohorts. Clinical variables from both cohorts were collated and subjected to univariate analysis to determine potential factors associated with post-ESD DPOB. Subsequently, we constructed a predictive model for DPOB risk employing logistic regression analysis. Model performance assessment used receiver operating characteristic curves in both the training and validation cohorts, with internal validation accomplished
resultsThe occurrence rate of DPOB was 9.93%. Univariate analysis revealed that the number of lesions, lesion size, lesion location, degree of submucosal fibrosis, and intraoperative bleeding were significantly associated with DPOB. Binary logistic regression analysis identified the number of lesions, lesion size, lesion location, and degree of submucosal fibrosis as independent DPOB determinants. A nomogram that was developed to quantify the DPOB risk exhibited that an increment in the total score corresponded to an increased risk. The model achieved area under the curve values of 0.831 and 0.821 in the model and validation groups, respectively, with
conclusionCollectively, the presence of multiple lesions, lesion size of ≥ 3 cm, lesion localization in the rectum, and severe fibrosis are significant independent predictors of DPOB in patients undergoing surgery for ECRC or PCLs. The proposed risk prediction model, which integrates these factors, demonstrates excellent predictive accuracy and clinical utility, thereby providing a valuable tool for risk stratification and postoperative management in this patient population.
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.