Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40897878›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025

Enucleation for insulinoma: consolidating evidence through systematic review and meta-analysis.

Marios Alogakos, Hayato Nakanishi, Dimitrios I Athanasiadis, Soroush Farsi, Shreehari Suresh, Maria M Witkowiak, Fatma A M Abdulsalam, Christian A Than, Travis J McKenzie, Eugene P Ceppa

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic insulinoma.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Marios AlogakosSchool of Medicine, St George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Hayato NakanishiDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Dimitrios I AthanasiadisDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Drive, EH 541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Soroush FarsiPaul Foster School of Medicine, El Paso, TX, 79905, USA.
Shreehari SureshOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headley Way, Headington, OX3 9DU, UK.
Maria M WitkowiakSchool of Medicine, University of Nicosia, 2417, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Fatma A M AbdulsalamMilton Keynes University Hospital, Milton Keynes, MK6 5LD, UK.
Christian A ThanSchool of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, 4072, Australia.
Travis J McKenzieDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Eugene P CeppaDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Drive, EH 541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. eceppa@iu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8368-2232

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreas-preserving procedures such as enucleation (EN) are indicated for select patients with insulinomas. Despite the increasing popularity of EN, no consensus has been reached on the preferred surgical approach for the management of insulinomas. The aim of this meta-analysis of proportions is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EN for patients with pancreatic insulinoma.

methodsCochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from database inception to December 2023. The pooled mean and proportions were analyzed using a random-effects model. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42024492786).

resultsTwenty-one studies with 803 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled mean tumor diameter was 1.5 cm (95%CI: 1.3-1.6). The pooled mean operative time was 142 min (95%CI: 118-166), postoperative hospital stay was 9.5 days (95% CI: 7.2-11.7), and estimated blood loss (EBL) was 71.3 mL (95% CI: 47.3-95.3). The overall postoperative occurrence rate was 37.3% (95%CI: 0.264-0.481, I

conclusionEN appears safe and effective in managing pancreatic insulinoma for selected patients, with low rates of grade C POPF and recurrence. Despite the promising results, more selective criteria based on the location of insulinoma with a larger sample size and extended follow-up periods are necessary to ascertain the safety and efficacy of the treatment.

Indexed as

InsulinomaOrgan Sparing TreatmentsPancreatectomyPancreatic NeoplasmsHumansLength of StayOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeEnucleationInsulinomaMeta-analysisPancreasSurgical outcomes

Identifiers

PMID40897878
PMCPMC12500762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.