ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2022
Management of Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors: Surgical versus Endoscopic Mucosal Resection.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of metastasis and survival in patients with T1-2 non-ampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors undergoing different treatment strategies.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison Between endoscopic submucosal dissection and laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery for non-ampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center retrospective cohort study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Non-Ampullary Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Article
- Review
- Association Between Female Sex and Better Survival in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.The Journal of surgical research · 2024Article
- Clinical features and prognostic factors of duodenal neuroendocrine tumours: A comparative study of ampullary and nonampullary regions.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Endoscopic Resection for Duodenal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms between 10 and 20 mm-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Surgical and Endoscopic Resection of Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors Have Similar Disease-Specific Survival Outcome.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023Article
- Long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection for duodenal neuroendocrine tumors.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Current status of the role of endoscopy in evaluation and management of gastrointestinal and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Recurrent Gastrointestinal Pseudo-obstruction Because of Well-Differentiated Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumor.ACG case reports journal · 2022Article
- Current updates and future directions in diagnosis and management of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundManagement of duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (DNETs) is not standardized, with smaller lesions (< 1-2 cm) generally treated by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and larger DNETs by surgical resection (SR). This study reviewed how patients were selected for treatment and compared outcomes. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with DNETs undergoing resection were identified through institutional databases, and clinicopathologic data recorded. χ
resultsAmong 104 patients, 64 underwent EMR and 40 had SR. Patients selected for SR had larger tumor size, younger age, and higher T, N, and M stage. There was no difference in progression-free (PFS) or overall survival (OS) between SR and EMR. In 1-2 cm DNETs, there was no difference in PFS between SR and EMR [median not reached (NR), P = 0.1]; however, longer OS was seen in SR (median NR versus 112 months, P = 0.03). In 1-2 cm DNETs, SR patients were more likely to be node-positive and younger. After adjustment for age, resection method did not correlate with survival. Comparison of surgically resected DNETs versus jejunoileal NETs revealed longer PFS (median NR versus 73 months, P < 0.001) and OS (median NR versus 119 months, P = 0.004) DISCUSSION: In 1-2 cm DNETs, there was no difference in survival between EMR and SR after adjustment for age. Recurrences could be salvaged, suggesting that EMR is a reasonable strategy. Compared with jejunoileal NETs, DNETs treated by SR had improved PFS and OS.
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.