ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2026
Endoscopic submucosal dissection in gastrointestinal lesions: Clinical outcomes from a single center.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEndoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) is increasingly utilized for en bloc resection of superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms, providing accurate histopathological evaluation and potential curative treatment. Despite its widespread use in Eastern Asia, clinical data from Turkiye remain limited. In this study, we aimed to retrospectively analyze clinical parameters such as technical success, complication rates, histopathological findings and local recurrence rates observed during follow-up in ESD procedures performed at our center.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 147 patients who underwent ESD or hybrid ESD at a tertiary center between January 2020 and January 2025. Demographic characteristics, lesion features, procedural outcomes, complications, and follow-up results were evaluated.
resultsEn bloc resection was achieved in 99.3% of cases, with R0 resection in 93.9%. Invasive adenocarcinoma was detected in 7 patients; 3 patients with invasive adenocarcinoma and 1 patient with incomplete resection were referred for surgery. Intra-procedural complications (mainly bleeding) occurred in 3.4%, while post-procedural complications (post-ESD coagulation syndrome or microperforation) occurred in 4.7%. All complications were managed conservatively, and none required surgery. Median hospital stay was 1 day. Recurrence was rare and successfully managed either endoscopically or surgically.
conclusionESD is a safe and effective treatment for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms in appropriately selected patients when performed by an experienced team. High technical success and low complication rates can be achieved in experienced centers. Future prospective, multicenter studies are warranted to establish standardized ESD practice in Turkiye.
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.