ArticleThe Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences2015
Biliary stenting for unresectable cholangiocarcinoma: A population-based study of long-term outcomes and hospital costs in Taiwan.
Article in The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular profiling and treatment pattern differences between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Article
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
Few studies have compared percutaneous biliary stenting (PBS) and endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS) in terms of long-term effects on cholangiocarcinoma (CC), and few have systematically evaluated outcome associations in Taiwan. This study aimed to compare long-term outcomes between two treatments for unresectable CC: PBS and EBS. After propensity score matching (PSM) to reduce the effect of selection bias, 1002 CC patients were included in this analysis: 501 in the PBS group and 501 in the EBS group. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to construct the survival curve for all CC patients, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used for multivariate assessment of outcome predictors. After PSM, group comparisons revealed a significantly longer length of stay in the PBS group compared to the EBS group (25 days vs. 19 days, respectively; p < 0.001). Hospital costs were also significantly higher in the PBS group than in the EBS group (US$126,575 vs. US$89,326, respectively; p < 0.001). The median survival time was 3.7 months in all CC patients, 3.5 months in the PBS group, and 4.0 months in the EBS group. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates were 17.6%, 6.1%, and 3.2% in all CC patients; 16.6%, 4.8%, and 3.2% in the PBS group; and 18.6%, 7.27%, and 3% in the EBS group, respectively. The most important predictor of survival is extrahepatic CC. Medical professionals and healthcare providers should carefully consider the use of EBS for initial treatment of obstructive jaundice in patients with unresectable CC.
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.