SynthesisPloS one2017
Complications of stent placement in patients with esophageal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of malignant esophageal stricture or esophageal leakage with a Niti-S™ covered anti-reflux stent is safe and efficient.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Prognosis of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Presenting with Obstruction.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Article
- Nutritional Status and the Outcomes of Endoscopic Stenting in Benign and Malignant Diseases of Esophagus.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Successful management of traumatic cervical esophageal injury by intraoperative microscopy and esophagoscopic assistance: a case description.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- Dosimetric Evaluation and Clinical Application of Radioactive Iodine-125 Brachytherapy Stent in the Treatment of Malignant Esophageal Obstruction.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Esophageal Dysphagia in the Elderly.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Efficacy and safety of standard and anti-reflux self-expanding metal stent: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019Article
- A Review of Self-Expanding Esophageal Stents for the Palliation Therapy of Inoperable Esophageal Malignancies.BioMed research international · 2019Review
- Esophageal self-expandable metal stent placement for the palliation of dysphagia due to lung cancer.Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi · 2019Article
- Oesophageal stenting: Status quo and future challenges.The British journal of radiology · 2018Review
- Autologous Flap Transfer for Esophageal Stricture Prevention After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in a Porcine Model.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Article
- Esophageal Stenting in Clinical Practice: an Overview.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPalliative treatments and stents are necessary for relieving dysphagia in patients with esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to simultaneously compare available treatments in terms of complications.
methodsWeb of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the Chi2 test and was quantified by I2. The results of this study were summarized in terms of Risk Ratio (RR). The random effects model was used to report the results. The rank probability for each treatment was calculated using the p-score.
resultsOut of 17855 references, 24 RCTs reported complications including treatment related death (TRD), bleeding, stent migration, aspiration, severe pain and fistula formation. In the ranking of treatments, thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.82), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.70), brachytherapy (p-score = 0.72) and antireflux stent (p-score = 0.74) were better treatments in the network of TRD. Thermal ablative therapy (p-score = 0.86), the conventional stent (p-score = 0.62), covered Evolution® stent (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.82) were better treatments in the network of bleeding complications. Covered Evolution® (p-score = 0.78), uncovered (p-score = 0.88) and irradiation stents (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments in network of stent migration complications. In the network of severe pain, Conventional self-expandable nitinol alloy covered stent (p-score = 0.73), polyflex (p-score = 0.79), latex prosthesis (p-score = 0.96) and brachytherapy (p-score = 0.65) were better treatments.
conclusionAccording to our results, thermal ablative therapy, covered Evolution® stents, brachytherapy, and antireflux stents are associated with a lower risk of TRD. Moreover, thermal ablative therapy, conventional, covered Evolution® and brachytherapy had lower risks of bleeding. Overall, fewer complications were associated with covered Evolution® stent and brachytherapy.
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.