ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative efficacy and safety of injection mucosa knife versus conventional techniques in endoscopic submucosal dissection for rectal laterally spreading tumors.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a standard treatment for rectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs). This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of the Injection Mucosa Knife (IMK) technique versus the conventional Dual Knife (DK) technique in ESD for rectal LSTs. A total of 229 patients with rectal LSTs were enrolled from four hospitals between June 2020 and June 2025 and were divided into two groups: the IMK group (n = 108) and the DK group (n = 121). The primary outcome measures included total procedure time, mucosal dissection time, and submucosal dissection rate, while the secondary outcomes encompassed intraoperative and postoperative complications as well as the R0 resection rate. Additionally, the efficacy and safety of the two groups were compared based on tumor size and endoscopic morphology. The IMK group demonstrated significantly shorter total procedure time (median 50 vs. 65 min, P < 0.001) and mucosal dissection time (median 40 vs. 56 min, P < 0.001), along with a higher submucosal dissection rate (median 0.12 vs. 0.08 cm²/min, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intraoperative perforation, severe hemorrhage, R0 resection, postoperative bleeding, fever, or pathology between the two groups (P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses based on tumor size (2.5 cm and ≥ 2.5 cm) and morphology (LST-G and LST-NG) consistently showed superior efficiency of the IMK technique without compromising safety. The IMK technique significantly improves the efficiency of ESD for rectal LSTs by reducing operative time and enhancing dissection rates, while maintaining comparable safety and outcomes to the conventional DK technique. IMK represents a promising advancement in ESD for rectal 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.