ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
The feasibility and safety of laparoscopic limited resection for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor: a propensity score-matched analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are rare and pose unique surgical challenges due to their anatomic complexity. However, the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for duodenal GISTs have not been fully evaluated. This study aimed to compare laparoscopic limited resection (LLR) with open limited resection (OLR) for primary localized duodenal GISTs.
methodsA retrospective analysis of patients undergoing duodenal GIST resection from January 2015 to April 2025 was conducted. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize confounder factors. Outcomes including operative metrics, postoperative recovery, complications, and recurrence were assessed between LLR and OLR. Statistical analyses compared cohorts pre- and post-matching.
resultsA total of 82 patients undergoing limited resection for duodenal GISTs were enrolled, of whom 51 received OLR and 31 received LLR. After 1:1 PSM (n = 58), the two groups were balanced based on age, gender, tumor size, tumor location, and neoadjuvant therapy. The statistical significance of primary outcomes remained consistent between pre- and post-matched cohorts. After PSM, LLR showed reduced intraoperative blood loss (20 vs 50 ml, p = 0.004) and faster oral intake resumption (2 vs 6 days, p = 0.014), with comparable operative time (155 vs 125 min, p = 0.297) and complication rates (24.1% vs 41.4%, p = 0.162). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the long-term survival outcomes confined by a median follow-up of 28 months.
conclusionLLR for duodenal GISTs is a feasible and safe treatment. Compared with OLR, LLR has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss and shorter time to oral intake, without compromising surgical and oncologic outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40938365What 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.