Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28779260›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Efficacy of endoscopic self-expandable metal stent placement versus surgical bypass for inoperable pancreatic cancer-related malignant biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Ka Wing Ma, Albert Chi Yan Chan, Wong Hoi She, Kenneth Siu Ho Chok, Wing Chiu Dai, Simon Tsang, Tan To Cheung, Chung Mau Lo

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 48% 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Contemporary Assessment of Need for Palliative Bypass After Aborted Pancreatoduodenectomy Following Neoadjuvant Therapy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ka Wing MaDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Albert Chi Yan ChanDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China. acchan@hku.hk.
Wong Hoi SheDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Kenneth Siu Ho ChokDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Wing Chiu DaiDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Simon TsangDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Tan To CheungDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
Chung Mau LoDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery & Division of Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China.
University of Hong Kong · HKQueen Mary Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsWe explored the difference in treatment efficacy of endoscopic self-expendable metal stent (SEMS) and surgical bypass (SB) in the management of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) secondary to pancreatic cancer.

methodA retrospective analysis was conducted using consecutive patients who were admitted from 2008 to 2016 receiving either endoscopic SEMS or SB. Diagnosis other than pancreatic cancer and SEMS placement as a pre-operative drainage before Whipple's operation was excluded. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to eliminate the confounding effect of heterogeneity between patients from two treatment groups. The rate of early, late treatment-related events, readmission and re-intervention, the duration of hospitalization, and the cost of treatment were compared.

resultsThere were 98 patients undergoing endoscopic SEMS or SB in the study period. The median age was 68.5 years and 52% of the patients had metastatic disease with median survival of 6 months. After 1:1 PS matching, 30 patients from each group were analyzed. The hospital stay was significantly longer in the SB group (13 vs. 5 days, P < 0.001) with a trend of higher rate of early treatment-related events (24.1 vs. 6.7%, P = 0.113). None of the patients in SB group developed recurrent biliary obstruction. Higher readmission rate (36.7 vs. 3.3%, P = 0.004) and re-intervention rate (36.7 vs. 10%, P = 0.033) were found in the SEMS group. The 3-, 6-, and 9-month re-intervention rates for endoscopic SEMS and SB group were 24.9, 29.4, 45.7, and 11.2, 11.2, and 11.2%, respectively (P = 0.03). When all subsequent readmissions were taken into account, there was no significant difference in hospital stay in both groups (7.5 vs. 14 days, P = 0.359); however, the total cost of treatment in SB group was significantly higher than that in the SEMS group (13,307 vs. 7113 USD, P = 0.035).

conclusionDespite being more invasive and expensive, surgical bypass provides durable relief of biliary obstruction. Endoscopic SEMS is associated with minimal procedural risks and low re-intervention rate, which are important considerations for frail patients with limited life expectancy.

Indexed as

Endoscopy, Digestive SystemSelf Expandable Metallic StentsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCholestasisFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPancreatic NeoplasmsPatient ReadmissionPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBiliary obstructionDouble bypassMetal stentPancreatic cancer

Identifiers

PMID28779260
OpenAlexW2744969005

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.