Endoscopy, Inhaltsverzeichnis Endoscopy 2017; 49(05): 512DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-101688 Letter to the editor © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York Reply to Kanesaka et al. Peter Rolny Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden › Institutsangaben Artikel empfehlen Abstract Artikel einzeln kaufen Volltext Referenzen References 1 Rolny P. The need for surgery after endoscopic treatment of colorectal neoplasms is the most important outcome criterion. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 80-82 2 Terasaki M, Tanaka S, Oka S. et al. Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for laterally spreading tumors larger than 20 mm. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 27: 734-740 3 Kobayashi N, Yoshitake N, Hirahara Y. et al. Matched case-control study comparing endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal tumors. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 27: 728-733 4 Arezzo A, Passera R, Marchese N. et al. Systemic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection vs endoscopic mucosal resection for colorectal lesions. United European Gastroenterol J 2016; 4: 18-29 5 Saito Y, Yamada M, So E. et al. Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection: technical advantages compared to endoscopic mucosal resection and minimally invasive surgery. Dig Endosc 2014; 26 (Suppl. 01) 52-61 6 Probst A, Ebigbo A, Märkl B. Endoscopic submucosal dissection of early rectal neoplasia: experience from a European center. Endoscopy 2016;