ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Timing of Oral Intake After Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe optimal timing for resuming oral intake after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) remains unclear. This study evaluated the safety and feasibility of initiating oral intake on postoperative day (POD) 1 compared with POD 2.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 220 patients who underwent colorectal ESD between 2017 and 2024 at Kyoto Katsura Hospital. Patients with incomplete procedures or delayed intake due to complications were excluded. According to the institutional pathway, oral intake was resumed on POD 1 (Early group) or POD 2 (Late group). After 1:1 propensity score matching using eight baseline covariates, 58 patients were included in each group. The primary outcome was procedure-related adverse events within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included postoperative symptoms and short-term body weight change.
resultsAfter matching, baseline characteristics were well balanced. Adverse event rates were comparable: postoperative bleeding (5% Early vs. 2% Late) and delayed perforation (0% vs. 2%), all managed conservatively. No significant differences were observed in postoperative fever (9% vs. 10%) or abdominal pain (10% vs. 7%). Weight loss on POD 3 was significantly smaller in the Early group (97.8% vs. 96.0% of baseline, P < 0.05).
conclusionsEarly oral intake after colorectal ESD was not associated with an increased risk of adverse events, suggesting that early feeding is a reasonable option for selected patients. Nevertheless, because these findings are exploratory, larger prospective studies are needed to establish whether early feeding can be adopted routinely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41400775What 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.