ArticleJPGN reports2025
Management of recalcitrant colorectal adenoma with endoscopic mucosal resection.
Article in JPGN reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this report, we present a case of an atypical presentation with a solitary recalcitrant adenomatous colonic polyp, managed by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). The patient is a 17-year-old previously healthy male, who was evaluated by the gastroenterology clinic in the setting of abdominal pain, hematochezia and iron deficiency anemia. Patient was found to have a solitary rectosigmoid adenomatous polyp with low-grade dysplasia, and a normal upper endoscopy. The rectosigmoid polyp was difficult to completely resect via snare polypectomy and showed persistent regrowth, requiring EMR for complete resection. Of note, family history is extensive for malignancy, with patient's hereditary colorectal cancer genetic testing showing a heterozygous variant of unknown significance in one copy of his RNF43 gene. Follow-up endoscopic evaluation was unremarkable, with no polyp recurrence and negative pathology at the resected polyp site.
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.