ArticleEndoscopy international open2017
Survey study on the practice patterns in the endoscopic management of malignant distal biliary obstruction.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 2017. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Endoscopic Management of Malignant Biliary Stricture.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Review
- Age, socioeconomic features, and clinical factors predict receipt of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in pancreatic cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimEndoscopic biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) is a common practice. Controversy persists with regard to its role in resectable MDBO, the optimal technical method and type of stent. The aim of this study was to evaluate practice patterns in the treatment of MDBO among endoscopists with varying levels of experience and practice backgrounds.
methodsElectronic survey distributed to members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). The main outcome measures included practice setting (academic vs. community), volume of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies (ERCPs), reasons for endoscopic drainage in MDBO, and technical approach.
resultsA total of 335 subjects (54 % community-based endoscopists) completed the survey. Most academic physicians (69 %) reported performing ≥ 150 ERCPs annually compared to 18.8 % of community physicians (
conclusionThere is significant variability in practice patterns for the treatment of MDBO. In spite of the recent ASGE guideline recommendations, some patients with resectable MDBO still undergo preoperative ERCP. Current clinical practices are not clearly supported by available data and underscore the need to increase adherence to gastrointestinal societal recommendations and an evidence-based approach to standardized patient care.
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.