ArticleAnnals of gastroenterology2021
Endoscopic mucosal resection of sporadic duodenal nonampullary adenoma: outcomes of 130 patients with a long-term follow up in two tertiary French centers.
Article in Annals of gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of local recurrence and piecemeal resection in duodenal underwater endoscopic mucosal resection.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2026Article
- Multi-Institutional Analysis of Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Nonfamilial Periampullary Adenoma: A Novel Risk Score to Guide Shared Decision-Making.Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2025Article
- Prophylactic clipping prevents delayed bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection of large non-ampullary duodenal lateral spreading lesions.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Resection Techniques for Duodenal and Ampullary Adenomas.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2023Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe long-term outcomes and safety of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of sporadic duodenal adenoma (SDA), and the management of adverse events need to be confirmed.
methodsA bicentric retrospective study was performed including all patients who underwent EMR for SDAs from 2003-2016. The primary aim was to evaluate the efficiency of EMR for SDA. The secondary objectives were to assess safety, recurrence management, predictive factors for treatment success, and adverse events.
resultsOne hundred thirty patients (134 procedures) were included (median age 65 years, 49.3% male). The mean SDA size was 20.7 (range 5-50) mm. Of the SDAs, 58.2% were category 3 of the Vienna classification, 35.8% were category 4, and 5.9% were category 5. The median follow up was 25.0 (range 2-120) months. Complete mucosal resection was achieved for 129/134 lesions (96.2%), with en bloc resection in 59/134 (44%). Recurrence occurred in 28.6% of cases (30/105 procedures). Recurrence was successfully treated by new endoscopic procedures in 72.2% (13/18) and by surgery in 27.8% (5/18). Delayed bleeding occurred in 13.4% of cases (18/134) and was successfully managed endoscopically. The perforation rate was 3.7% (5/134); perforations were managed without surgery in 60% (3/5 patients) of cases.
conclusionsEndoscopic treatment of SDA appears to be effective and relatively safe in tertiary centers. All bleeding complications were endoscopically controlled, and perforation was rare. Recurrence was frequent but could be managed endoscopically. EMR is confirmed as a first-line treatment in cases of SDA, and surgery is useful only if repeated EMRs fail.
Indexed as
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.