ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery2025
Evaluation of efficacy and safety of different endoscopic polypectomy techniques for colonic polyps.
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 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.
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal polypectomy is fundamental to the prevention of colorectal cancer, utilizing several endoscopic techniques. Robust comparative data regarding the efficacy and safety of these modalities in clinical practice are limited.
aimTo evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of three endoscopic polypectomy techniques, namely, high-frequency electroresection (HFE), cold snare polypectomy (CSP), and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), for the treatment of colonic polyps.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included adults who underwent endoscopic resection of pathologically confirmed colorectal polyps at Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University between January 2015 and December 2023. Patients were grouped by technique: HFE (
resultsBaseline demographics and polyp characteristics, except for polyp diameter, were comparable among groups. CSP achieved the highest
conclusionCSP offers the best safety profile and lowest recurrence rate among patients undergoing endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps, whereas HFE confers a high R0 resection rate but increased risk of adverse events. EMR remains essential for large polyps despite elevated recurrence. Technique selection should be tailored according to polyp characteristics and patient risk factors to optimize outcomes.
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.