Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2026
The results of randomized controlled trial comparing effectiveness of transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus endoscopic submucosal dissection.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03718351 (Randomized Controlled Trial of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Versus Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery For Early Rectal Neoplasms And Large Rectal Adenomas), which is not on this 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.
Randomized Controlled Trial of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Versus Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery For Early Rectal Neoplasms And Large Rectal Adenomas: Сomparison Of Treatment Efficacy And Safety.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComparison of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) is based only on retrospective studies. With the aim of comparing the effectiveness of TEM and ESD, a single-center randomized clinical trial (RCT) registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03718351 was undertaken. PATIENTS AND
methodspatients with rectal adenomas ≥ 3 cm were randomized (1:1) to TEM or ESD. The primary outcome was R0 resection rate, the secondary end-points were en bloc resection rate, perioperative morbidity and 2-year recurrence rate.
resultsbetween 2018 and 2023, 236 patients were included into the ESD or TEM group (n = 118 each). One patient (0.8%) from the ESD group had conversion to the TEM one. The mean size of lesions was 4.2 cm in the TEM vs. 4.1 cm in the ESD group (p = 0.39). Perioperative complications (> II by Clavien-Dindo) developed in 20/118 (16.9%) patients after TEM vs. 18/118 (15.2%) patients after ESD (p = 0.9). R0 resection and en bloc removal were 79.7% and 97.5% after TEM versus 67.5% and 85.6% after ESD (p = 0.04 and p = 0.002, respectively). Completion surgery performed in 9 (7.6%) and 6 (5.1%) cases, respectively. Those patients were excluded from an analysis of long-term results. Thirty-six patients from the TEM and 48 from the ESD group were lost for the follow up. After at least two-year surveillance, the recurrence rate was identical between the groups: 4/73 (5.4%) in TEM vs. 3/63 (4.8%) in ESD (p = 1.0).
conclusionTEM resulted in a higher R0 and en bloc resection rate comparing to ESD; no difference in the recurrence rate was demonstrated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41136652What 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.