ReviewAnnals of gastroenterology
Incidentally discovered, intentionally managed: a narrative review of the last decade's updates on the management of neuroendocrine tumor of the appendix.
Review in Annals of gastroenterology. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasms (aNENs) represent an increasingly recognized and heterogeneous subset of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), most often identified incidentally on appendectomy specimens. Postoperative management relies on accurate risk stratification grounded in histopathological assessment and aligned with major international guidelines (WHO, ENETS), which distinguish between well-differentiated NETs (NET grades 1 to 3) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas. Critical prognostic determinants shaping therapeutic decision-making include tumor size, proliferative index (Ki-67), depth of invasion-particularly mesoappendiceal involvement-and lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Consensus recommendations suggest simple appendectomy as definitive treatment for low-risk tumors (<1 cm) and right hemicolectomy for high-risk lesions (>2 cm) or those exhibiting LVI. However, the management of intermediate-sized aNENs (1.0-2.0 cm) remains the principal area of clinical uncertainty, with emerging data suggesting that appendectomy alone may be sufficient for carefully selected patients without adverse pathological factors. This review synthesizes and critically appraises the most recent evidence and international guidelines with the goal of refining current clinical practice. In particular, it provides an updated framework for individualized risk stratification, evaluates the balance between oncological benefit and procedural morbidity in determining the optimal surgical approach, and outlines evidence-based surveillance strategies to support a more consistent, risk-adapted multidisciplinary management of aNENs.
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.