ArticleGut and liver2025
Endoscopic Features of Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A Proposed Endoscopic Classification.
Article in Gut and liver, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Localized Gastrointestinal Light Chain (AL) Amyloidosis Under Surveillance for Five Years: A Case Report.DEN open · 2027Article
- Endoscopic and Histological Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Case Report: A rare presentation of gastrointestinal amyloidosis: unmasking the hidden culprit of chronic epigastric pain and weight loss.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Case Report: Image-enhanced endoscopic characteristics of gastric amyloidosis with narrow-band imaging comparison.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Diagnosis and Clinical Course of Isolated Upper Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A Retrospective Observational Study.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Gastrointestinal amyloidosis (GIA) is a common condition that presents with a variety of endoscopic features. However, the classification of these endoscopic features of GIA and its clinical implications have not been investigated. Methods: The endoscopic findings of 127 patients with GIA were reviewed and classified by three experienced endoscopists. The relationships of the endoscopic classification of GIA with clinical amyloidosis entities, symptoms, and patient outcomes were evaluated. Results: Five distinct types of endoscopic lesion features were identified in GIA patients: protruding, granular, hemorrhagic, ulcerative, and nonspecific. The hemorrhagic type was most common (n=32, 25.2%), followed the by protruding (n=30, 23.6%), ulcerative (n=28, 22.0%), granular (n=20, 15.7%), and nonspecific types (n=17, 13.4%). The protruding type was significantly prevalent in patients with localized amyloidosis (23/49, 71.4%), whereas the hemorrhagic type was the most common in patients with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (20/47, 42.6%), and the ulcerative type was the most common in patients with amyloid A amyloidosis (8/17, 47.1%) (p<0.001). The granular type was related to dysmotility symptoms (p=0.018). Among 30 GIA patients with the protruding type, two died, whereas 36.1% of patients with the other endoscopic types (35/97) died during a median follow-up of 95.5 months (interquartile range, 65.8 to 132.0 months) (p=0.007). Conclusions: Five types of GIA lesions were identified, and on this basis, an endoscopic classification system was proposed. This system may be of diagnostic and prognostic value.
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.