ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Traction Device-Assisted Complete Closure to Prevent Colorectal Post-ESD Coagulation Syndrome.
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. 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.
- Endoscopic Closure After Colorectal ESD: A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis on Its Efficacy in Preventing Adverse Events.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVarious methods have been developed for mucosal defect closure after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), but prolonged procedure time and technical complexity remain challenges. The SureClip Traction Band (SCTB; Micro-Tech, Nanjing, China), originally designed as a traction device, has recently been used for defect closure. This study evaluated its efficacy for defect closure following colorectal ESD.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed colorectal ESD cases (≤ 50 mm) between January 2023 and August 2025 in which SCTB was used for defect closure. The primary outcome was the complete closure rate. Secondary outcomes included closure time, numbers of SCTBs and additional clips used, and the incidence of delayed bleeding (DB), delayed perforation (DP), and post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS). Historical control cases (non-SCTB group) were ESDs for lesions ≤ 50 mm performed between January 2022 and March 2023.
resultsIn total, 55 lesions were closed using SCTB. The mean resected specimen size was 35.5 ± 9.0 mm, and the complete closure rate was 98.2%. The median closure time (IQR) was 8.6 (4.5) min, with an average of 1.1 ± 0.3 SCTBs and 6.6 ± 2.1 additional clips used per case. Complication rates in the SCTB versus non-SCTB groups were similar for DB (1.8% vs. 1.5%, p = 1.00) and DP (0% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.56). However, the incidence of PECS was significantly lower in the SCTB group (3.6% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.04).
conclusionEndoscopic closure using SCTB achieved a high complete closure rate with a short procedure time and reduced incidence of PECS after colorectal ESD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41518449What 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.