Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2026
Efficacy and safety of a needle-type knife that injects fluid through its tip compared with a conventional needle-injection knife for colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a randomized controlled trial (with video).
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimA newly developed tip-type needle injection knife (TK) can pump fluid through its tip. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a TK in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) compared with a conventional sheath-type needle injection knife (DK).
methodsThis prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled trial included patients with superficial colorectal tumors measuring 20-50 mm. The patients were randomly assigned to either the TK or DK group. The primary and secondary outcomes were procedure time and ESD procedure details, respectively.
resultsThe TK and DK groups comprised 130 and 125 patients, respectively. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. No significant differences were observed in procedure time or dissection speed. However, the TK group required significantly fewer intraprocedural device insertions/removals. Total local injection volume was also significantly lower in the TK group than in the DK group. The number of intraoperative perforations did not significantly differ between the groups. Among lesions ≥ 30 mm, the TK group had a significantly shorter procedure time and faster dissection speed.
conclusionsThe TK and DK demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety. However, the lower number of device insertions/removals with the TK suggested greater procedural convenience. For colorectal ESD procedures involving lesions ≥ 30 mm, the TK may also reduce procedure time more effectively than the DK. CLINICAL
trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) UMIN 000052397.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41340006What 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.