ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2018
A Prospective Multicenter Study of a Fully Covered Metal Stent in Patients with Distal Malignant Biliary Obstruction: WATCH-2 Study.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cholecystitis: A review of incidence, risk factors, prevention, and management.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Article
- Computed tomography-based prediction of pancreatitis following biliary metal stent placement with the convolutional neural network.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- A novel fully covered metal stent for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: results of a multicenter prospective study.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparison of 6-mm and 10-mm-diameter, fully-covered, self-expandable metallic stents for distal malignant biliary obstruction.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Endoscopic Reintervention for Recurrence of Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Developing the Best Strategy.Gut and liver · 2022Review
- Laser-cut-type versus braided-type covered self-expandable metallic stents for distal biliary obstruction caused by pancreatic carcinoma: a retrospective comparative cohort study.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Covered self-expandable metal stents for distal biliary obstruction from pancreatic carcinoma: what type of stent is preferred?Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Comparing the 14-mm uncovered and 10-mm covered metal stents in patients with distal biliary obstruction caused by unresectable pancreatic cancer: a multicenter retrospective study.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Risk Factors of Duodenobiliary Reflux-Related Dysfunction of Covered Biliary Metal Stents after Treatment of Duodenal Stricture in Patients with Malignant Biliary and Duodenal Obstruction.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Advances in stent therapy for malignant biliary obstruction.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2021Review
- Self-expandable metallic stent placement above the papilla without endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Article
- Endoscopic Sphincterotomy before Fully Covered Metal Stent Placement Is Not Required for Distal Malignant Biliary Stricture due to a Pancreatic Head Tumor.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2019Article
- Self-Expanding Metallic Biliary Stents: Time to Suit Up?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBoth fully covered (FC) and partially covered (PC) self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are now commercially available for distal malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). While FCSEMS can be easily removed at the time of re-interventions, it is theoretically prone to migration. However, few comparative data between FC and PC SEMSs have been reported.
aimsThe aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of FCSEMS with those of PCSEMS.
methodsThis was a multicenter, prospective study of FCSEMS for unresectable distal MBO with a historical control of PCSEMS, which was previously reported as the WATCH study. The primary outcome was recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO), and secondary outcomes were stent migration, stent removal, stent-related adverse events, and survival.
resultsA total of 151 cases with unresectable distal MBO undergoing FCSEMS placement were enrolled and compared with a historical cohort of 141 cases undergoing PCSEMS placement. No significant differences were found in the rate of RBO (29 vs. 33%; P = 0.451), time to RBO (318 vs. 373 days; P = 0.382), and survival (229 vs. 196 days; P = 0.177) between FCSEMS and PCSEMS. The rate of stent migration also did not differ significantly between the two groups (14 vs. 8%; P = 0.113). The removal of FCSEMSs was successful in all 24 attempted cases (100%).
conclusionsFCSEMSs appeared comparable to PCSEMSs in terms of RBO without a significant increase in stent migration rate in patients with unresectable distal MBO. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000007131.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29218484What 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.