Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27845340›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of gastroenterology2017

Plastic vs. Self-Expandable Metal Stents for Palliation in Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Series of Meta-Analyses.

Majid A Almadi, Alan Barkun, Myriam Martel

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03870386 (EUS-guided Biliary Drainage of First Intent With the Lumen Apposing Metal Stent vs. ERCP in the Management of Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction), which is not on this map. Cited by 125 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
125citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
16.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT03870386 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

EUS-guided Biliary Drainage of First Intent With the Lumen Apposing Metal Stent vs. ERCP in the Management of Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcGill University Health Centre/Research Institute of the McGill University Health CentreRan2019 to 2023Enrolled144ConditionsBiliary ObstructionArmsEUS-BD with LAMS, ERCP
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

125 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 263 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Role of Endoscopy in Malignant Biliary Obstruction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

65 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Majid A AlmadiDivision of Gastroenterology, The McGill University Health Center, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Alan BarkunDivision of Gastroenterology, The McGill University Health Center, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Myriam MartelDivision of Gastroenterology, The McGill University Health Center, Montreal General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
McGill University · CAMontreal General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSelf-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are thought to have an advantage over plastic stents in achieving biliary drainage.

methodsWe performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of knowledge databases, from January 1980 to September 2015, for randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SEMS vs. plastic stents in the palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Primary outcomes were durations of stent patency, patient survival, and 30-day mortality. Numerous secondary outcomes were assessed, and extensive sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed.

resultsIn all, 20 RCTs totaling 1,713 patients yielded a weighted mean difference (WMD) in time to stent patency (4 studies) of 4.45 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31, 8.59; GRADE=moderate) favoring SEMS. There were no differences in overall patient survival (5 studies) WMD=0.67 months (95% CI, -0.66, 1.99; GRADE=moderate), or 30-day mortality (8 studies) odds ratio (OR)=0.80 (95% CI, 0.52, 1.24; GRADE=moderate) but there was a higher symptom-free survival at 6 months (4 studies) OR=5.96 (95% CI, 1.71, 20.81; GRADE=moderate). SEMS use resulted in lower rates of late complications (11 studies) OR=0.43 (95% CI, 0.26, 0.71; GRADE=moderate), sepsis or cholangitis (14 studies) OR=0.53 (95% CI, 0.37, 0.77; GRADE=high), blocking from sludge (8 studies) OR=0.11(95% CI, 0.07, 0.17; GRADE=moderate), and mean number of re-interventions (8 studies) WMD=-0.83 interventions (95% CI, -1.64, -0.02; GRADE=moderate). There was a longer patency of SEMS for those without a prior drainage attempt (2 studies) WMD 7.70 months (95% CI, 7.14, 8.25; GRADE=high). Although a survival advantage was found when an uncovered SEMS was used (3 studies) WMD 1.31 months (95% CI, 0.30, 2.32; GRADE=high), but not partially or fully covered SEMS (2 studies) WMD -0.66 months (95% CI, -1.02, -0.30; GRADE=high) vs. plastic stents, and for SEMS in the setting of pre- or post-procedural antibiotic administration (2 studies) WMD 1.49 months (95% CI, 0.27, 2.70; GRADE=high), and performance of a sphincterotomy (2 studies) WMD 1.63 months (95% CI, 0.42, 2.84; GRADE=high).

conclusionsKeeping in mind the noted risk of bias in source data, the use of SEMS compared with plastic stents, in the palliation of patients with malignant biliary obstruction results in longer stent patency, lower complications rates, and fewer re-interventions, whereas exhibiting survival benefits in selected subgroups of patients.

Indexed as

Palliative CarePlasticsSelf Expandable Metallic StentsCholangitisCholestasisDrainageHumansPancreatic NeoplasmsPostoperative ComplicationsSepsisStentsPlastics

Identifiers

PMID27845340
OpenAlexW2555084583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.