ArticleEndoscopy international open2026
Endotherapeutic approach to gastric antral vascular ectasia: Argon plasma coagulation vs. endoscopic band ligation: Randomized clinical trial.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) causes iron-deficiency anemia and gastrointestinal bleeding, sometimes requiring frequent transfusions. Argon plasma coagulation (APC) is effective for treating lesions, but newer methods like endoscopic band ligation (EBL) need to be explored. Patients and methods: Conducted at a tertiary referral center in India, this single-blinded, prospective, parallel-group randomized study involved 60 patients assigned (1:1) to APC or EBL for endoscopic GAVE obliteration. The primary outcome was clinical success, defined as lesion obliteration and the number of endoscopic sessions required for lesion obliteration. Secondary outcomes included technical success, rebleeding episodes, GAVE recurrence, and hospitalization or transfusion needs. Registered as CTRI Reg. No. CTRI/2023/10/058739. Results: At 2- and 3-month follow-ups, endoscopic GAVE obliteration was higher in the EBL group (63.3% vs. 30%; Conclusions: Both EBL and APC effectively treated GAVE lesions and relieved symptoms. Although overall outcomes were similar, EBL required fewer sessions, had less and delayed rebleeding, reduced transfusion needs, and improved hemoglobin levels, indicating higher efficacy in deeper lesion obliteration.
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.