ArticleEndoscopy international open2025
Diagnostic and therapeutic value of appendoscope-assisted endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy.
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.
- Appendoscope-Assisted Endoscopic Retrograde Appendicitis Therapy Versus Antibiotic Monotherapy for Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: The appendoscope, derived from the peroral digital single-operator cholangioscope, is an endoscopic device enabling direct visualization of the appendix lumen for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes. This study aimed to investigate diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy of appendoscope-assisted endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) in patients with appendicitis. Patents and methods: A total of 131 patients were enrolled in the study, with 125 included in the final analysis. Patient demographics, procedure success, abdominal pain resolution, appendoscope manifestations, treatment strategies, procedure time, duration of antibiotic use, postoperative hospital stay, and comorbidities were recorded. Complications and recurrences were followed up. These variables were subsequently analyzed to evaluate efficacy of appendoscope-assisted ERAT. Results: The technical success rate of appendoscope-assisted ERAT was 98.5%, and the clinical success rate was 100%. Appendoscope visual manifestations included appendicolith (76.8%, n = 96), stenosis (16.8%, n = 21), foreign body (6.4%, n = 8), mucosal inflammation (13.6%, n = 17), and perforation (3.2%, n = 4), with these findings occurring individually or in combination. Abdominal pain disappeared within 12 hours post-procedure in 79% of patients (n = 99). Average procedure time was 50.3 ± 18.9 minutes. Antibiotic therapy duration was less than 2 days in 39% of patients (n = 49), whereas 19% (n = 24) received no antibiotics. Average postoperative hospital stay was 1.9 ± 1.4 days. Concomitant intestinal lesions were identified in 16 patients (12.8%). Recurrence occurred in 4.8% of patients (n = 6) during a 4- to 16-month follow-up. No complications were recorded. Conclusions: Appendoscope-assisted ERAT is a feasible, accurate, safe, and effective alternative for diagnosis and treatment of appendicitis.
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.