ReviewDigestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society2026
Endoscopic Assessment and Management of Colorectal Serrated Lesions: Current Comparative Practice, Challenges, and Future Directions.
Review in Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Serrated-carcinoma pathway accounts for approximately 15%-30% of sporadic colorectal cancers (CRC) and contributes disproportionately to right-sided interval cancers. Key precursors include sessile serrated lesion (SSL) and SSL with dysplasia (SSLD); traditional serrated adenoma, and also the recently described superficially serrated adenoma which warrants attention. However, high-quality evidence guiding best practice for resection indications, technique selection, and post-resection surveillance intervals remains limited and varied, with differences between Western and Japanese guidelines. This narrative review integrates clinicopathologic and practical perspectives to provoke further discussion for a standardized universal guideline approach. For nondysplastic SSLs, cold polypectomy techniques may be considered in selected lesions with defined margins and detailed documentation, whereas those with suspected dysplasia, non-lifting or scarring, requiring en bloc resection, favor endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection for accurate histopathology. Surveillance should be prioritized by histopathology and completeness of resection, with an index shorter interval assessment of the resection site at 6-12 months after piecemeal resection or when margins are involved or indeterminate, followed by risk-tiered intervals. Because the detection of serrated lesions determines resection type, quality and surveillance interval, endoscopists should standardize bowel preparation, lesion assessment after mucus cap clearance, use image-enhanced endoscopy when appropriate, and apply targeted dye spray when borders are indistinct. Finally, we outline priority research; prospective, serrated lesion-focused cohorts and trials-to ascertain durable outcomes of cold snare resection strategies, refine surveillance intervals, and reconcile regional practice differences, with the overarching goal of reducing post-colonoscopy interval CRC and overall CRC incidence with high-quality colonoscopy.
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.