ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Endoscopic Closure After Colorectal ESD: A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis on Its Efficacy in Preventing Adverse Events.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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
Endoscopic closure of mucosal defects after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been increasingly adopted to prevent adverse events. Various devices and techniques, including conventional clips, clips with various technical tips, clip with line, clip with device, special clips, and suturing devices, have been developed, achieving high rates of complete closure (approximately 95% on average), although procedure times and technical complexity vary considerably. Among 14 eligible comparative studies, including randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies published up to April 2026, a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of complete closure after colorectal ESD in preventing delayed bleeding (DB), delayed perforation (DP), and post-ESD coagulation syndrome (PECS). For DB, pooled analysis demonstrated that complete endoscopic closure was significantly associated with a reduced risk of DB (odds ratio [OR]: 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-0.97,
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.