ArticleScientific reports2025
Non-ampullary duodenal neuroendocrine tumours - a tertiary referral centre experience.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Duodenal neuroendocrine tumours (duodenal NETs) are uncommon tumours, accounting for 3% of all duodenal malignancies. They can have varied clinical behaviour and often can have metastatic disease at presentation. Due to the unpredictable clinical behaviour, European Neuroendocrine Tumour Society guidelines recommend the consideration of resection of these lesions if the disease is localised. Endoscopic resection is challenging in the duodenum due to the thin mucosal wall and difficulty with access depending on the location of the lesion. We reviewed our experience of 42 non-ampullary duodenal NETs managed at a single centre. 81% had resection for the duodenal NETs of which 50% were resected endoscopically. Endoscopic outcomes were excellent with macroscopic resection of all lesions, there was 1 perforation and no 30-day mortality. Of cases considered for surgery, 38% had nodal involvement and some metastatic disease. Lesions of grade 2 and those larger than 15 mm in size had a high risk of nodal involvement. A careful selection of cases with accurate staging using EUS, PET imaging and careful lesion assessment enables high success rates for endoscopic resection.
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.