ReviewCancers2026
Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Neoplasms: Is the West Catching Up?
Review in Cancers, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has revolutionized the management of superficial colorectal neoplasms, offering superior en bloc resection rates compared with conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). While ESD has been the standard of care in East Asian countries for over two decades, its adoption in Western countries has been considerably slower, hampered by the steep learning curve, prolonged procedural times, limited training infrastructure, and differences in disease epidemiology. However, recent years have witnessed a paradigm shift, with growing evidence from Western multicenter studies demonstrating outcomes that increasingly approach those reported from high-volume Eastern centers. The landmark RESECT-COLON randomized trial provided level-1 evidence supporting the superiority of ESD over piecemeal EMR for large colorectal polyps. Concurrently, novel training paradigms, technological innovations including traction-assisted devices and artificial intelligence (AI)-guided systems, and evolving societal guidelines from the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) are accelerating Western adoption. This state-of-the-art review comprehensively examines the current landscape of colorectal ESD in Western practice, highlighting the evolution of outcomes, training pathways, guideline recommendations, technological advances, and future directions. We provide a critical appraisal of the East-West outcome gap and discuss strategies to bridge this divide, positioning colorectal ESD as an increasingly viable first-line therapy for appropriate lesions in Western endoscopy centers.
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.