ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Feasibility of endoscopic resection for large pedunculated duodenal lesions (with video).
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of water pressure method in colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection by novice endoscopists.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection using the water pressure method for diverticulum-associated lesions: A case series study (with video).Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA standard treatment method for pedunculated duodenal lesions has not yet been established. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of endoscopic resection (ER) for pedunculated duodenal lesions, especially for large lesions.
methodsThis study retrospectively reviewed cases of pedunculated duodenal lesions treated with ER at our institute between July 2010 and January 2021. We collected data on the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes. In addition, the cases were divided based on the treatment provided for the lesion, i.e., the ESD and snare resection groups, and we compared the data between the two groups.
resultsThirty-eight cases were included in this study. The overall en bloc resection rate was 95%. No perforation occurred in any of the cases. There were 10 cases treated with ESD, which were considered difficult to achieve en bloc resection using snare forceps, and 28 cases treated with snare resection. Although the median lesion size was significantly larger in the ESD group than in the snare resection group (27 [range 23-66] vs. 19 [range 6-55] mm, P = 0.0052), treatment outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. Among the 10 cases treated using ESD, en bloc resection was achieved in all cases, along with specimen retrieval without any perforations, despite the large size of the lesions.
conclusionER could be performed to achieve a high en bloc resection rate without any perforations in pedunculated duodenal lesions, even in extremely large (e.g., ≧ 60 mm) lesions, suggesting that ER is feasible and may be an alternative to surgical resection for large pedunculated duodenal lesions.
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.