ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Endoscopic direct-vision therapy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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.
- Endoscopic direct-vision therapy vs. antibiotics for acute uncomplicated appendicitis: a retrospective cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute uncomplicated appendicitis is common. Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is definitive but invasive, while endoscopic retrograde appendicitis therapy (ERAT) carries radiation risks. Endoscopic direct-vision appendicitis therapy (EDAT), an ultra-minimally invasive organ-preserving technique, lacks clarity on patient selection, long-term recurrence, and clinical applicability. Aim: To explore EDAT's short-term efficacy, safety, and applicable population via comparison with LA, and contextualize it within existing evidence. Methods: A retrospective study (Dec 2023-Dec 2024, Zhejiang Hospital) included 41 EDAT and 46 LA patients. Clinical indicators, serum inflammatory factors (WBC, CRP), recurrence, and complications were compared; subgroup (gender/age) and correlation analyses were performed. Results: Baseline characteristics (sex, age, follow-up time) were balanced between the two groups ( Conclusion: Endoscopic direct-vision appendicitis therapy is a feasible, safe ultra-minimally invasive alternative for selected patients, outperforming LA in symptom relief and inflammation control. However, single-center, small-sample, and short follow-up limit conclusions; large-scale prospective studies with 1-3 years of follow-up are needed.
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.