SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2022
Endoscopic Management of Ampullary Adenomas in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Syndrome: A Systematic Review with Pooled Analysis.
Synthesis in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Japanese society for cancer of the colon and rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2024 for the clinical practice of hereditary colorectal cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Guideline
- Routine duodenal papillary biopsy enhances detection of duodenal papillary adenoma in familial adenomatous polyposis patients: a prospective cohort study.British journal of cancer · 2026Observational
- Incidence and risk factors for recurrence of ampullary adenomas after endoscopic papillectomy: Comparative analysis of familial adenomatous polyposis and sporadic ampullary adenomas in an international multicenter cohort.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2024Article
- Endoscopic and chemopreventive management of familial adenomatous polyposis syndrome.Familial cancer · 2023Review
- Personalized endoscopic surveillance and intervention protocols for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: the European FAP Consortium strategy.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Advantages of total proctocolectomy with straight ileoanal anastomosis plus pedicled omental transposition for familial adenomatous polyposis: a preliminary study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Article
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 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic papillectomy is a viable therapy in ampullary lesions. Prior studies have reported on outcomes of sporadic ampullary lesions, and only small cohort studies have reported outcomes associated with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) syndrome.
aimsWe performed a systematic review with pooled analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of EP for treating ampullary adenomas in FAP.
methodsWe performed a comprehensive literature search of major databases from inception to May 2020. Studies that included patients with endoscopically resected ampullary lesions and FAP were eligible. The rate of technical success, en bloc resection, piecemeal resection, recurrence, and adverse events was pooled by means of a random-effects model to obtain a proportion with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsSix studies, including a total of 99 patients, were included in our final analysis. Patient age ranged from 28 to 91 years. Pooled technical success was 90.3% (CI 76.9-96.3%, I
conclusionEndoscopic papillectomy offers high technical success but remains challenging in patients with FAP, particularly due to high recurrence rates.
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.