Observational studyDigestive diseases and sciences2026
Endoscopic Resection for Non‑ampullary Duodenal Lesions: 13 Years of Experience from a Large Tertiary Center in China.
Observational study in Digestive diseases and sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEndoscopic resection (ER) has gradually emerged as an optional treatment method for non-ampullary duodenal lesions (NADLs); however, this procedure is associated with technical challenges and a notable risk of adverse events (AEs). The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ER for NADLs in a real-world clinical setting.
methodsThis was a retrospective observational study. Patients who received ER for NADLs were consecutively enrolled between January 2012 and December 2024. A total of 262 patients with a median (interquartile range) follow-up period of 24.0 (12.0-48.0) months were included, comprising 178 with epithelial lesions and 84 with subepithelial lesions. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment outcomes were systematically documented and compared. Additionally, the associations between clinical variables and the occurrence of AEs were also analyzed.
resultsThe en bloc and complete resection rates were 88.8% and 84.3%, respectively, for epithelial lesions and 88.1% and 86.9%, respectively, for subepithelial lesions. Lesions located in the duodenal junction (odds ratio [OR] 8.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.92-41.98) and clipping closure (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17-0.87) were identified as independent predictors of AEs in the epithelial lesion group, whereas intraoperative perforation (OR 12.32; 95% CI 2.03-74.60) and size of defect (OR 3.34; 95% CI 1.46-7.63) were identified in the subepithelial group.
conclusionER is a relatively effective and safe therapeutic approach for NADLs in real-world practice, with a controllable risk of AEs and a low recurrence rate. Clinicians should pay more attention to postprocedural care for patients with duodenal junction lesions, intraoperative perforation, or large defects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42323758What 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.