ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Accuracy of Size Measurement of Large (≥ 2 cm) Colorectal Laterally Spreading Tumours: A Prospective Video-Based 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
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsSize estimation of large (≥ 20 mm) colorectal laterally spreading tumors (LSTs) is important in endoscopic decision making and determining risk of incomplete resection and adverse events. Data is lacking on endoscopists' accuracy in estimating LST size. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a prospective multicenter video-based study. 46 LSTs were video recorded endoscopically, resected en-bloc and pinned for high-precision measurement prior to formalin fixation. An international group of 24 endoscopists were presented with LST videos and provided an LST size estimate within 10 mm categories (20-29 mm, 30-39 mm, etc.). Correct measurements were defined as an assigned 10 mm category containing the true LST size. Primary outcome was accuracy of endoscopists' LST size estimates, defined as the proportion of correct measurements.
results1104 measurements were performed with an overall accuracy of 27.2% (95% CI 22.1-32.9). 55.6% (95% CI 46.5-64.4) were underestimated and 17.2% (95% CI 12.3-23.6) were overestimated. Accuracy for LSTs < 40 mm, ≥ 40 mm, ≥ 50 mm, and ≥ 60 mm was, respectively, 42.2, 19.2, 13.1, and 7.7%. The proportion and magnitude of size underestimation increased with polyp size. Granular mixed LSTs were the most underestimated in size. There were no clinically significant differences in accuracy when stratified by endoscopist sex, ESD volume, and location.
conclusionsVisual size estimation of large colorectal LSTs is highly inaccurate, with considerable underestimation. This may result in misjudging the projected resection time, incomplete resection risk, and adverse event risk. Tools to assist endoscopists in measuring large LSTs are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41795746What 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.