ArticleJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Comparison of Endoscopic Therapies for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Endoscopic Muscularis Superficialis Dissection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.
Article in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 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.
- Comparison of Endoscopic Therapies for Small Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Endoscopic Muscularis Superficialis Dissection Versus Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
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
Background and Aim: Rectal neuroendocrine tumors (rNETs) often exhibit submucosal tumor-like growth. While endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used, it carries a risk of positive vertical margins, often necessitating repeated surveillance and imposing both financial and psychological burdens on patients. To address this limitation, we developed endoscopic muscularis superficialis dissection (EMSD), a technique involving controlled dissection into the superficial muscularis propria layer to improve complete resection rates. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic outcomes of EMSD and ESD for small rNETs. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 82 patients (88 rNETs) undergoing ESD or EMSD between May 2019 and June 2025. Primary outcomes included complete resection rates, complication rates, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: The study analyzed 35 lesions treated with EMSD and 53 with ESD. Both groups had similar tumor characteristics. Compared to ESD, EMSD achieved significantly higher rates of both complete vertical margin resection (100% vs. 69.8%, Conclusions: Compared with ESD, EMSD achieved superior performance in the resection of rNENs ≤ 10 mm in diameter regardless of submucosal invasion depth.
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.