ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2025
Endoscopic treatment of large colorectal lesions: A retrospective analysis of efficacy and safety.
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. 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.
- Large colorectal lesions: Expanding the boundaries of endoscopic management.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer continue to rise. For early-stage colorectal cancer, endoscopic resection has become a preferred or important treatment option due to its significant advantages in operative time, extent of trauma, and medical costs. However, increasing lesion diameter significantly elevates the technical difficulty of endoscopic resection. Currently, robust evidence-based evidence regarding the upper size limit for safely and effectively resecting lesions endoscopically remains lacking.
aimTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic resection for colorectal lesions ≥ 30 mm in diameter.
methodsThis retrospective study reviewed data from 102 patients who underwent endoscopic resection for colorectal lesions measuring ≥ 30 mm in diameter at General Hospital of Northern Theater Command between January 2023 and July 2024.
resultsAmong 102 patients who underwent endoscopic resection, 99 received endoscopic submucosal dissection and 3 underwent endoscopic full-thickness resection. Four patients (3.9%) required conversion to surgical radical resection postoperatively. All patients exhibited favorable wound healing at the resection sites, and no long-term complications were observed during the 3-month postoperative colonoscopy follow-up. The primary perioperative complication was post-endoscopic submucosal dissection electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) (24/102, 23.5%). Multivariate analysis identified lesion location in the transverse colon as an independent risk factor for PEECS occurrence (odds ratio = 6.734, 95% confidence interval: 1.623-27.945,
conclusionLarge colorectal lesion diameter does not constitute an absolute contraindication to endoscopic resection. Experienced endoscopic centers can achieve complete resection with a favorable efficacy and safety profile. Notably, lesion location in the transverse colon is identified as an independent risk factor for PEECS.
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.