ArticleEndoscopy international open2026
Resection of large, broad-based pedunculated and semi-pedunculated colorectal polyps using a scissor-type endoscopic submucosal dissection knife.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Endoscopic resection of large, broad-based pedunculated and semi-pedunculated polyps can be technically difficult. Conventional snare resection risks immediate bleeding and piecemeal excision. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of a scissor-type endoscopic submucosal dissection (ST-ESD) knife for these lesions. Patients and methods: A single-center retrospective study was conducted of all patients who underwent ST-ESD resection of pedunculated or semi-pedunculated polyps with head size ≧ 20 mm and stalk width ≧ 10 mm. Primary outcomes were en bloc resection, intraprocedural and delayed bleeding, and perforation. Secondary outcomes were R0 resection and recurrence at first follow-up. Results: Fifty-eight resections were identified (75.6% male; median age 60 years). Median head size was 30 mm (range 20-70) with median stalk width 15 mm (range 10-50). Of them, 74.1% were in the sigmoid colon. Successful resection was achieved in 52 of 58 (89.7%); 44 (75.9%) by ST-ESD alone and eight (13.8%) snare-assisted. Six (10.3%) were abandoned; five due to visible muscle retraction and one dense stalk fibrosis. All successful resections were en bloc with R0 in 52 of 52 (100%). Minor intraprocedural bleeding occurred in nine of 58 (15.5%) and was controlled endoscopically. Forty-seven of 52 defects (90.4%) were closed prophylactically with endoscopic clips. There were no incidences of delayed bleeding or perforation. Histopathology was benign in 51 of 52 (98.1%). One adenocarcinoma was treated surgically for high-risk features. Endoscopic follow-up was available in 41 of 52 (78.8%) with no recurrence seen. Zero of six abandoned cases referred for surgery contained evidence of malignancy in the surgical specimen. Conclusions: ST-ESD is safe and effective for resection of large, broad-based pedunculated and semi-pedunculated colorectal polyps.
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.