ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Endoscopic management of duodenal perforations during endoscopic ultrasound: a case series.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The study aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of using an over-the-scope clip (OTSC)for closing duodenal perforations caused by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) procedures, as well as to evaluate the efficacy of definitive management strategies for duodenal perforations induced during EUS. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted involving patients who developed iatrogenic duodenal perforations during linear EUS at the Digestive Endoscopy Center of Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, from January 2017 to December 2024. Diagnoses, management, and outcomes were identified and retrospectively reviewed in four of these patients. Results: Among 5,174 linear EUS procedures, four cases of perforation occurred (0.077%). All patients were women, with a mean age of 76 years (range: 71-81). Perforations were caused by the curvilinear probe in all cases: Three during diagnostic EUS procedures and one after EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Defect sizes ranged from 3 mm to 15 mm. All perforations with conservative endoscopic management were successfully closed without surgical intervention. The hospitalization duration varied widely, ranging from 32 to 92 days, due to differences in the clinical conditions of the inpatients. Conclusion: Endoscopic closure of iatrogenic duodenal perforations ≤ 15 mm using an OTSC is safe and effective when performed by experienced endoscopists. Early identification of perforation, guided by clinical symptoms and risk factors, followed by rapid evaluation and endoscopic intervention, may reduce complications and facilitate recovery.
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.