Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42627604›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026

Forward- vs. Oblique-Viewing Endoscope for Duodenal Papillectomy: A Comparative Study on Efficacy and Safety.

Ke-Yi Guo, Xin Zhou, Yan Liu, Ping-Ting Gao, Pei-Rong Xu, Jian-Wei Hu, Zu-Qiang Liu, Huan-Kai Shou, Ping-Hong Zhou, Hao Hu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ke-Yi Guo *Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Xin Zhou *Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Yan Liu *Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Ping-Ting Gao *Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Pei-Rong Xu *Endoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jian-Wei HuEndoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Zu-Qiang LiuEndoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Huan-Kai ShouEndoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Ping-Hong ZhouEndoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. zhou.pinghong@zs-hospital.sh.cn.
Hao HuEndoscopy Center and Endoscopy Research Institute, Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Endoscopy, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. hu.hao1@zs-hospital.sh.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimEndoscopic papillectomy is an effective approach for selected papillary lesions. However, no consensus on the optimal choice of endoscope for the operation. Here we conducted a comparative study to investigate the effect of forward-viewing endoscopes (FVE) and oblique-viewing endoscopes (OVE) in the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillectomy.

methodsPatients who underwent endoscopic papillectomy with OVE and FVE between February 2019 and August 2025 were reviewed retrospectively, regardless of histopathological type. Demographic characteristics, procedure-related results, adverse events, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify the risk factors of piecemeal resection and adverse events.

resultsA total of 125 patients were included, with 65 patients in the FVE group and 60 patients in the OVE group specifically. Baseline characteristics was comparable between the two groups. The OVE-based papillectomy had a longer procedure time (21 vs. 39 min; p = 0.001), and a higher en bloc resection rate (61.5% vs. 80%; p = 0.024). After adjustment by propensity score matching (PSM), OVE remained associated with a higher en bloc resection rate (P < 0.05). No statistical significance was found in the histopathology, postoperative hospitalization, adverse events and follow-up outcomes. Further logistic regression analysis indicated that submucosal injection was the only risk factor for piecemeal resection, and no statistically significant factor was found to be related to adverse events.

conclusionsCompared with FVE, OVE tends to yield a higher en bloc resection rate for endoscopic papillectomy, and both modalities demonstrate similar safety outcomes. Submucosal injection was suggested to be a risk factor affecting en bloc resection.

Indexed as

En bloc resectionEndoscopic papillectomyForward-viewing endoscopeOblique-viewing endoscopePostoperative pancreatitisProphylactic stent

Identifiers

PMID42627604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.