ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2025
Endoscopic resection of colitis-associated neoplasia: A scoping review.
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. 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUlcerative colitis (UC) increases the risk of colorectal dysplasia. While colectomy was once standard, advances in polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), and endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) now allow organ-sparing management in selected cases.
aimTo summarize current evidence on the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of these techniques in UC-associated neoplasia.
methodsA scoping review was conducted using PubMed and EMBASE (1975-May 2025) with the search: ("endoscopic submucosal dissection"/exp OR "endoscopic mucosal resection" OR "full thickness resection" OR "polypectomy") AND ("ulcerative colitis"/exp OR "ulcerative colitis" OR "pouch"). Screening followed PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included those reporting outcomes, feasibility, or novel techniques in the endoscopic management of UC-associated dysplasia.
resultsOf 1075 identified records, 754 were screened after duplicate removal, and 48 studies were included. Polypectomy was safe and effective for well-demarcated, lifting lesions without adjacent dysplasia. EMR has excellent outcomes for small, polypoid, or right-sided lesions that demonstrated adequate lifting. ESD is indicated for flat, large, non-polypoid, or fibrotic lesions, particularly in the left colon. ESD achieved
conclusionEndoscopic resection offers a spectrum of curative, minimally invasive options for managing dysplasia in UC. EMR remains appropriate for simple, lifting lesions, while ESD and EFTR broaden the therapeutic landscape for complex or fibrotic pathology. Lesion morphology, lifting characteristics, and operator experience should guide technique selection. Long-term outcomes are favorable with appropriate surveillance, though the risk of metachronous neoplasia necessitates continued monitoring.
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.