ReviewJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Hybrid Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review 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. 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection (h-ESD) has emerged as a modified approach to overcome the technical challenges associated with conventional ESD (c-ESD). However, evidence comparing their safety and efficacy in colorectal neoplasia remains limited. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to April 2025 for randomized and propensity-matched studies comparing h-ESD with c-ESD for colorectal neoplasia. The primary outcome was en bloc resection, with secondary outcomes including procedure time, adverse events, bleeding, and perforation. Data synthesis was performed using a random-effects model in RevMan. Results: Five studies (three RCTs and two propensity-matched cohorts) involving 1047 participants were included. The pooled analysis demonstrated no significant differences in en bloc resection rates (OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.26-1.56; Conclusion: Hybrid ESD demonstrated equivalent safety and efficacy to c-ESD for colorectal neoplasia, with the added advantage of significantly shorter procedure times. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to validate its role in clinical practice.
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.