ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Feasibility and safety of endoscopic resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a risk prediction model for piecemeal resection during endoscopic resection of gastric GISTs.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Endoscopic resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is still considered a great challenge with a high risk of complications. This study aimed to evaluate effectiveness and safety of endoscopic resection for duodenal GIST. Patients and methods: Between June 2013 and August 2024, we performed a retrospective study of patients with duodenal GISTs who underwent endoscopic resection at Zhongshan Hospital. Data on patient characteristics, clinical outcome, and follow-up were collected. Results: A total of 73 patients with duodenal GISTs were enrolled, including 31 patients who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and 42 who underwent endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR). Mean lesion size was 1.2 ± 0.5 cm and 1.9 ± 0.9 cm, respectively. En bloc resection rates were 96.8% and 95.2%, respectively. Rates of R0 resection were 45.2% and 42.9%, respectively. Rates of R1 resection were 54.8% and 57.1%, respectively. No patient transferred to open surgery. Postoperative adverse events included delayed bleeding (1 case), delayed perforation (1 case), delayed wall edema (2 cases), hydrothorax (1 case), and retroperitoneal infection (1 case). Mean hospital stays were 4.1 ± 2.8 days and 6.2 ± 4.9 days, respectively. No metastasis or duodenal stenosis were detected during the follow-up period (64.8 ± 43.6 months and 61.3 ± 40.2 months, respectively). Local recurrence occurred in one patient with high recurrence risk at 56 months after EFTR. Conclusions: ESD and EFTR are safe, minimally invasive treatments for duodenal GISTs. Moreover, the EFTR technique may have advantages of completely resecting lesions originating from the deep muscularis propria layer, particularly lesions with extraluminal growth.
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.