ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Endoscopic papillectomy of major papilla lesions: Single tertiary care center experience.
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.
- Endoscopic papillectomy of major papilla lesions: Single tertiary care center experience.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is an effective endoscopic modality for managing ampullary lesions. This study aimed to evaluate predictors for recurrence and adverse events (AEs) in patients who underwent EP for major papilla lesions. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent endoscopic snare papillectomy for a major papilla lesion between January 2006 and December 2021. We assessed multiple patient- and procedure-related variables to identify risk factors related to post-EP AEs and lesion recurrence using both univariate and multivariate analysis. In addition, we compared baseline characteristics and outcomes in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) vs. sporadic ampullary lesions (SALs). Results: Fifty-one patients (11 FAP) were included in the final analysis. Recurrence was seen in 17 patients (37.0%) among those who followed up after technical success. Complete histological (R0) resection was the only factor associated with no recurrence following EP (odds ratio [OR] 5.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-20.8, Conclusions: R0 resection was associated with reduced risk of recurrence whereas delayed bleeding after EP is associated with an increased risk of developing PEP. EP is safe and effective for removing ampullary lesions irrespective of lesion type.
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.