Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42248921›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Preclinical and clinical evaluation of a new flexible high pressure injection knife for endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Raphael Olivier, Jérémie Albouys, Clement Juglard, Ludovico Alfarone, Raouf Boubekeur, Rémi Collin, Véronique Van der Voort, Hugo Lepetit, Romain Legros, Jérémie Jacques and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Raphael OlivierGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Poitiers, 2 rue de la Milétrie, Poitiers, 86000, France. raphael.olivier0714@orange.fr.
Jérémie AlbouysGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Clement JuglardGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Ludovico AlfaroneDepartment of Gastroenterology, Endoscopy Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy.
Raouf BoubekeurGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Hospital of Orléans, Orléans, France.
Rémi CollinGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Véronique Van der VoortGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Hugo LepetitGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Romain LegrosGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Jérémie JacquesGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Marion SchaeferGastroenterology and Hepatology Department, Nancy University Regional Hospital, Nancy, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We studied a newly developed high-pressure injection flexible knife, to offer potential procedural simplification in colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD). Animal study: open randomized controlled study using an anesthetized porcine model, five ESD novices alternated between the flexible high-pressure injection Knife (HPK) and a Standard Knife (SK). Clinical study: a prospective cohort study conducted in an expert center analyzed colorectal ESD performed with HPK or SK, with propensity score matching. Animal study: 41 gastric and 59 colorectal ESDs were performed. No significant differences were observed between HPK and SK. Operator satisfaction was significantly better with HPK. Clinical study: 379 colorectal ESDs were performed including 70 with HPK. After propensity score matching based on predictors of technical difficulty, 69 lesions per group (HPK vs. SK) were compared. Histological R0 resection rate was significantly higher with HPK than with SK (n = 64 (95.52%) vs. n = 56 (82.35%) p = 0.026), as was the curative resection rate (n = 62 (93.94%) vs. n = 53 (77.94%), p = 0.012). No significant differences were noted regarding procedural speed or perforation rates. HPK improves trainee satisfaction during animal ESD and yields superior histological and curative resection rates in complex colorectal ESD cases when used by experts, without increasing risks.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionAgedAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPressureProspective StudiesSwine

Identifiers

PMID42248921
PMCPMC13478487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.