BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Retrospective Cohort Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Sep 16, 2025; 17(9): 111734
Published online Sep 16, 2025. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v17.i9.111734
Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the patients and tumors, n (%)

p-ESD group (n = 49)
c-ESD group (n = 54)
P value
Age (years)48.9 ± 11.550.2 ± 9.90.1011
Sex0.4812
Male27 (55.1)26 (48.1)
Female22 (44.9)28 (51.9)
Tumor location0.2822
Upper rectum10 (20.4)16 (29.6)
Lower rectum39 (79.6)38 (70.4)
Tumor size, cm0.6 (0.3-1.4)0.5 (0.2-1.3)0.1233
Pathological grade
G146 (93.9)49 (90.7)0.8222
G23 (6.1)5 (9.3)
Vascular invasion1 (2.0)0 (0.0)0.4764
Lymphatic invasion0 (0.0)0 (0.0)-
Additional surgery1 (2.0)0 (0.0)0.4764
Table 2 Clinical outcomes in the pretraction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection and conventional pretraction-assisted endoscopic submucosal dissection groups, n (%)

p-ESD group (n = 49)
c-ESD group (n = 54)
P value
Dissection time, minutes9.03 (7.0-12.3)14.9 (11.0-20.5)< 0.0011
En bloc resection49 (100)54 (100)1.000
R0 resection49 (100)48 (88.9)0.0282
Adverse events
Minor intraoperative bleeding5 (10.2)14 (25.9)0.040
Major intraoperative bleeding2 (4.1)10 (18.5)0.0302
Delayed bleeding0 (0.0)2 (3.7)0.4962
Muscularis propria injury0 (0.0)9 (16.7)0.0032
Intraoperative perforation0 (0.0)3 (5.6)0.2442
Delayed perforation0 (0.0)0 (0.0)-
Tumor recurrence0 (0.0)0 (0.0)-