ArticleJournal of digestive diseases
Submucosal Pressure Ejection Endoscopic Dissection (SPEED): A New Technique in Increasing the Safety and Efficacy of ESD (With Video).
Article in Journal of digestive diseases. 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.
- Is Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Entering Into a New Era?Journal of digestive diseasesArticle
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
Abstract
objectivesThe universal adoption of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is limited by its technical demands, slow learning curve, long procedure time, and high risks of bleeding, muscular layer injury, and perforation. We developed the submucosal pressure ejection endoscopic dissection (SPEED) technique that combines pressure injection, incision, dissection, and coagulation and avoids frequent device exchange during ESD. We aimed to introduce this novel SPEED strategy and evaluate its therapeutic advantages for superficial gastrointestinal neoplasms.
methodsAltogether 985 patients who underwent ESD for early gastrointestinal tumors between January 2020 and April 2024 were included and divided into the SPEED group and the conventional ESD group. Clinical outcomes, including en bloc and R0 resection rates, resection time, intraprocedural application of hemostatic forceps, procedure-related adverse events, and local recurrence, were evaluated.
resultsSPEED achieved en bloc and R0 resection rates of 99.85% and 99.40%, respectively. Compared with conventional ESD, SPEED was associated with a shorter median resection time (33 min vs. 57 min), less frequent intraprocedural application of hemostatic forceps (2.71% vs. 19.25%), a lower intraprocedural perforation rate (0.15% vs. 2.48%), and a lower post-procedure hemorrhage rate (1.51% vs. 5.90%).
conclusionsWith the additional high-pressure injection, the SPEED technique greatly improves ESD efficiency and ensures a clearer visual field during ESD, thereby reducing risk of complications. It efficiently improves the speed and safety of dissection during ESD.
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.