ArticleBMC gastroenterology2026
Missed duodenal tumors at upper endoscopy: a five year retrospective cohort study at West China hospital (2019-2023).
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuodenal tumors constitute 35%-55% of small bowel neoplasms, yet the misdiagnosis rate remains substantial. This study investigated the clinical features of duodenal tumors missed during endoscopic examination.
methodsThis retrospective cohort analysis included patients who were diagnosed with duodenal tumors between 2019 and 2023 at West China Hospital. Demographic data, tumor characteristics, endoscopic findings, and missed diagnosis records were extracted from electronic medical records and telephone follow-ups. The exploratory analysis identified the reasons for the missed diagnosis during endoscopy.
resultsAmong the 307 enrolled patients with duodenal tumors, 36 patients (34 with adenocarcinomas and 2 with neuroendocrine tumors) had undergone previous endoscopic examinations without a definitive diagnosis, yielding a missed detection rate of 11.7%. In all missed cases, the mean number of endoscopic procedures performed prior to definitive diagnosis was 2 (range: 1-8), with an average interval of 11.1 months (range: 3-36 months). The anatomical distribution of missed lesions included the duodenal papilla (44.4%, 16/36), duodenal bulb (25.0%, 9/36), bulb-descending junction (5.6%, 2/36), descending (13.9%, 5/36) and horizontal (5.6%, 2/36) parts. The causes of missed diagnoses included exposure errors (n = 20), judgment errors (n = 5), biopsy errors (n = 8), and unclassified errors (n = 3). The difference in the pattern of missed duodenal tumors between tertiary hospitals and non-tertiary hospitals was not statistically significant (P > 0.05).
conclusionThe missed diagnosis rate of duodenal tumors is high during endoscopic examination. Comprehensive endoscopic observation and improved detection awareness of duodenal tumors are essential in both tertiary and nontertiary hospitals.
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.