ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Antibiotic prophylaxis against electrocoagulation syndrome after esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection: a single center retrospective study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is widely used to treat superficial lesions of the esophagus. Post-ESD electrocoagulation syndrome (PEECS) is a commonly occurring adverse event, however, the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing PEECS remains unclear.
aimsTo evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) in reducing the incidence of PEECS in patients undergoing esophageal ESD.
methodsThis retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent ESD for single esophageal lesions at The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University (1/2022-12/2024). Propensity score (PS) matching was applied to compare outcomes between AP and non-AP groups. Outcomes included incidences of PEECS, fever, and chest pain, along with various laboratory parameters and the length of stay (LOS) in the hospital.
resultsAfter PS matching, 262 patients were analyzed. The incidence of PEECS was 26.7% in the AP group versus 30.5% in the non-AP group, but this was not significantly different (P = 0.494). Univariate analysis identified muscle layer injury as a potential risk factor for PEECS [OR 1.986, 95%CI 1.125-3.504, P = 0.018].
conclusionAP did not reduce PEECS incidence in patients undergoing esophageal ESD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.