ReviewEndoscopy international open2018
ESD versus EMR in non-ampullary superficial duodenal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Endoscopy international open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of endoscopic submucosal dissection as a treatment option for duodenal tumors ≥ 20 mm: a systematic review and meta-analysis by lesion size.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Pooled it
- Underwater Versus Conventional Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Superficial Non-ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of hybrid versus conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for non-ampullary duodenal submucosal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Predictors of local recurrence and piecemeal resection in duodenal underwater endoscopic mucosal resection.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2026Article
- Endoscopic resection of gastric cancer involving pylorus and duodenum using novel anchor ring-shaped thread counter traction.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Advancements in endoscopic closure: Embracing a new era of managing complications and postprocedural defects after endoscopic submucosal dissection.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery for duodenal neoplasms: a retrospective single-center study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Hot versus cold snare endoscopic mucosal resection for nonampullary duodenal lesions: consolidating the cold revolution into clinical practice.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2025Article
- Outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection in cirrhotic patients: First American cohort.World journal of hepatology · 2024Article
- Comparison of scissor-type knife to non-scissor-type knife for endoscopic submucosal dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Safety of Duodenal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Superficial Non-Ampullary Duodenal Epithelial Tumor: A Single-Center Study in the United States.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection aided by a protruding anchor created by saline injection into the distal duodenal fold.Endoscopy · 2023Article
- Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: Short-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection performed in the Western setting.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection with retroperitoneal dissection for duodenal myogenic cyst with adjustable traction from an independently controlled snare.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2023Article
- Risk factors of post-polypectomy bleeding and recurrence in children with colorectal polyps after endoscopic mucosal resection: a retrospective cohort study.Translational pediatrics · 2022Article
- Outcomes of endoscopic mucosal resection for large superficial non-ampullary duodenal adenomas.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Endoscopic management of NADTs.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Prospective multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of cold forceps polypectomy for ≤ 6-mm non-ampullary duodenal low-grade adenomas.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Endoscopic submucosal dissection in the duodenum: Ready for prime time?Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- Exposed endoscopic full-thickness resection for duodenal submucosal tumors: Current status and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsEndoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been developed as an option for treatment of esophageal, gastric and colorectal lesions. However, there is no consensus on the role of ESD in duodenal tumors.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis compared ESD and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) in sporadic non-ampullary superficial duodenal tumors (NASDTs), including local experience. We conducted a search in PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane library up to August 2017 to identify studies that compared both techniques reporting at least one main outcome (en-bloc/complete resection, local recurrence). Pooled outcomes were calculated under fixed and random-effect models. Subgroup analyses were conducted.
resultsA total of 753 patients presenting with 784 NASDTs (242 ESD, 542 EMR) in 14 studies were included. Tumor size (MD: 5.88, [CI95 %: 2.15, 9.62],
conclusionsDuodenal ESD for NASDTs may achieve higher en-bloc and complete resections at the expense of a greater perforation rate compared to EMR. The impact on local recurrence remains uncertain.
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.