The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Endoscopic submucosal dissection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline
Open accessAbstract
UNLABELLED: This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system 1 2 was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 ESGE recommends endoscopic en bloc resection for superficial esophageal squamous cell cancers (SCCs), excluding those with obvious submucosal involvement (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) may be considered in such lesions when they are smaller than 10 mm if en bloc resection can be assured. However, ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the first option, mainly to provide an en bloc resection with accurate pathology staging and to avoid missing important histological features (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 2 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection with a curative intent for visible lesions in Barrett's esophagus (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESD has not been shown to be superior to EMR for excision of mucosal cancer, and for that reason EMR should be preferred. ESD may be considered in selected cases, such as lesions larger than 15 mm, poorly lifting tumors, and lesions at risk for submucosal invasion (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 3 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for the treatment of gastric superficial neoplastic lesions that possess a very low risk of lymph node metastasis (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). EMR is an acceptable option for lesions smaller than 10 - 15 mm with a very low probability of advanced histology (Paris 0-IIa). However, ESGE recommends ESD as treatment of choice for most gastric superficial neoplastic lesions (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). 4 ESGE states that the majority of colonic and rectal superficial lesions can be effectively removed in a curative way by standard polypectomy and/or by EMR (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESD can be considered for removal of colonic and rectal lesions with high suspicion of limited submucosal invasion that is based on two main criteria of depressed morphology and irregular or nongranular surface pattern, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm; or ESD can be considered for colorectal lesions that otherwise cannot be optimally and radically removed by snare-based techniques (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
(2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 · Cited by 8,477
Endoscopic treatment of high-grade dysplasia and early stage cancer in Barrett's esophagus
Peters, F. P., Kara, M. A., Rosmolen, W. D., Aalders, M. C. G., ten Kate, F. J. W., Bultje, B. C., Krishnadath, K. K., Fockens, P., van Lanschot, J. J. B., van Deventer, S. J. H., et al. (2005) · Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · doi:10.1016/s0016-5107(05)00063-5 · Cited by 172
Cited by
Smyth, E. C., Nilsson, M., Grabsch, H. I., van Grieken, N. C., & Lordick, F. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)31288-5 · Cited by 4,803
Hashiguchi, Y., Muro, K., Saito, Y., Ito, Y., Ajioka, Y., Hamaguchi, T., Hasegawa, K., Hotta, K., Ishida, H., Ishiguro, M., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1007/s10147-019-01485-z · Cited by 1,922
Pimentel-Nunes, P., Libânio, D., Marcos-Pinto, R., Areia, M., Leja, M., Esposito, G., Garrido, M., Kikuste, I., Megraud, F., Matysiak-Budnik, T., et al. (2019) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/a-0859-1883 · Cited by 993
Self-citationBanks, M., Graham, D., Jansen, M., Gotoda, T., Coda, S., di Pietro, M., Uedo, N., Bhandari, P., Pritchard, D. M., Kuipers, E. J., et al. (2019) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2018-318126 · Cited by 647
Self-citationDeprez, P. H., Moons, L. M. G., OʼToole, D., Gincul, R., Seicean, A., Pimentel-Nunes, P., Fernández-Esparrach, G., Polkowski, M., Vieth, M., Borbath, I., et al. (2022) · Endoscopy · doi:10.1055/a-1751-5742 · Cited by 384
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Pimentel-Nunes, P., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Ponchon, T., Repici, A., Vieth, M., De Ceglie, A., Amato, A., Berr, F., Bhandari, P., Bialek, A., Conio, M., Haringsma, J., Langner, C., Meisner, S., Messmann, H., Morino, M., Neuhaus, H., Piessevaux, H., Rugge, M., Saunders, B., Robaszkiewicz, M., Seewald, S., Kashin, S., Dumonceau, J.-M., Hassan, C., & Deprez, P.
- Venue
- Endoscopy
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 2015-08-28
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 09
- Pages
- 829-854
- ISSN
- 0013-726X (ISSN-L)
- 1438-8812
- OpenAlex
- W2288698772
- Cited by
- 1,329
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 61.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Endoscopic submucosal dissection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1055/s-0034-1392882
- The paper
- Pimentel-Nunes, P., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Ponchon, T., Repici, A., Vieth, M., De Ceglie, A., Amato, A., Berr, F., Bhandari, P., Bialek, A., Conio, M., Haringsma, J., Langner, C., Meisner, S., Messmann, H., Morino, M., Neuhaus, H., Piessevaux, H., Rugge, M., . . . Deprez, P. (2015). Endoscopic submucosal dissection: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1392882
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.