ArticleBMC gastroenterology2026
Comparative effectiveness of the Clutch Cutter versus Dual knife for esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection by non-expert endoscopists: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA Clutch Cutter is a grasping scissor forceps device used for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). This device can grasp and incise the target tissue similar to the action of a biopsy forceps. Therefore, ESD with a Clutch Cutter may be easier and safer than that performed with non-scissor-type knives. This study verified the usefulness of the Clutch Cutter by nonexpert endoscopists during ESD for superficial esophageal cancer.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study enrolled 125 patients who underwent ESD as a first-line therapy for superficial esophageal cancer between January 2016 and June 2023 at Saiseikai Suita Hospital. The patients were divided into groups based on the ESD device: a Clutch Cutter or a non-scissor-type device (dual knife). The clinical characteristics and technical outcomes were compared between the two groups.
resultsAmong one hundred twenty-five patients, seventy-nine patients underwent nonexpert endoscopic treatment, of which twenty-one patients underwent ESD with a Clutch Cutter and fifty-eight patients with a dual knife. There is a significant difference in sex distribution between the two groups, with a higher percentage of males in the dual knife group (94.8%) compared to the Clutch Cutter group (71.4%) (p = 0.01). Patients in the Clutch Cutter group had shorter procedure times (60 min) than those in the dual knife group (93 min) (p = 0.002). However, en bloc and R0 resection rates were not significantly different between the groups. In the multivariate analysis, procedure time (min) was significantly correlated with device type (coefficient 58.86, 95% confidence interval: 26.99-90.72) and tumor size (coefficient 4.9, 95% confidence interval: 3.58-6.21).
conclusionESD for superficial esophageal cancer with the Clutch Cutter significantly shortened procedure time compared to that with the dual knife for nonexpert endoscopists. Therefore, the Clutch Cutter may be a preferred-device for nonexpert endoscopists.
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.