Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29282638›Full record

SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2018

Efficacy and Safety of Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents in Management of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: Are They Better Than Plastic Stents? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Tariq Hammad, Muhammad Ali Khan, Yaseen Alastal, Wade Lee, Ali Nawras, Mohammad Kashif Ismail, Michel Kahaleh

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.4field-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.

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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. [Endoscopic Management of Chronic Pancreatitis].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Inadvertent placement of an AXIOSRadiology case reports · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Endoscopic step up: When and how.Surgery open science · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Tariq HammadDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Muhammad Ali KhanDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Yaseen AlastalDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Wade LeeCarlson and Mulford Libraries, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Ali NawrasDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Mohammad Kashif IsmailDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Michel KahalehDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Weill Cornell Medical College, 1305 York Avenue, 4th Floor, New York, NY, 10021, USA. mkahaleh@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0836-6114
University of Toledo · USUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center · USBaylor College of Medicine · USCornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsEndoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage has been increasingly utilized as a first-line therapeutic modality for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC). Recently, lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have been utilized for management of PFCs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative efficacy and safety of LAMS in the management of PFC (primary outcome). We also compared the efficacy and safety of LAMS with multiple plastic stents (MPS) in the management of PFC (secondary outcome).

methodsWe searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases from inception to November 5, 2016, to identify studies (with ≥ 10 patients) reporting technical success, clinical success, and adverse events (AE) of EUS-guided transmural drainage of PFC using LAMS. Weighted pooled rates (WPR) were calculated for technical success, clinical success and AE. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated and pooled to compare LAMS with MPS in terms of technical success, clinical success, and AE. Pooled mean difference (MD) was calculated to compare the number of endoscopic sessions required by each type of stent to achieve clinical success. All analyses were done using random effects model.

resultsEleven studies with 688 patients were included in this meta-analysis. WPR for technical success of LAMS in PFC management was 98% (96, 99%), (I

conclusionsLAMS seem to have excellent efficacy and safety in the management of PFCs. They may be preferred over plastic stents as they are associated with better clinical success and lesser adverse events.

Indexed as

MetalsPlasticsStentsBiocompatible MaterialsDrainageHumansPancreatic DiseasesBiocompatible MaterialsMetalsPlasticsEUSLumen-apposing metal stentsPancreatic fluid collectionsPancreatic pseudocystsPlastic stentsWalled-off necrosis

Identifiers

PMID29282638
OpenAlexW2777138253

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.