ArticleDEN open2026
Gel-immersion Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Superficial Colorectal Neoplasms: A Retrospective Study Comparing Conventional Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.
Article in DEN open, 2026. 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.
- Article
- Usefulness of electrohydraulic lithotripsy gel-immersion cholangioscopy for giant common bile duct stones.Endoscopy · 2026Article
- Efficacy of gel immersion endoscopic submucosal dissection for colorectal lesions.Endoscopy international open · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Gel-immersion endoscopy offers benefits such as buoyancy, traction, and a clear visual field without gas insufflation. While some case reports have described colorectal gel-immersion endoscopic submucosal dissection (Gi-ESD), there have been no consecutive case series. This study aimed to clarify the usefulness of Gi-ESD. Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with colorectal neoplasms who underwent ESD. Gi-ESD was defined as mucosal incision and submucosal dissection performed under clear gel. The primary outcomes were en bloc and histologic R0 resection rates, whereas the secondary outcomes were procedure time, dissection speed, and adverse events. Results: Among 260 ESD cases, 29 and 231 were in the Gi-ESD and conventional ESD groups, respectively. Gel was used for submerged or poorly accessible lesions. The Gi-ESD group had a significantly larger tumor diameter (25 mm vs. 18 mm, Conclusion: Gi-ESD may be an alternative approach for treating submerged gravity-side or poorly approached colorectal lesions.
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.