SynthesisSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association
Comparison of long-term efficacy between endoscopic and percutaneous biliary drainage for resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the comparison of the incidence of seeding metastasis between endoscopic biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for resectable malignant biliary obstruction.World journal of surgical oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Timing of intervention: Assessing earlyWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2026Article
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A National Survey from the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association.Gut and liver · 2024Article
- Is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography safe during pregnancy?Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology AssociationArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimFor resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction, it remains a controversy whether to choose percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) or endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD). A systematic review was conducted to compare the long-term efficacy between the two techniques. MATERIALS AND
methodsEligible studies were searched from January 1990 to May 2018, comparing the long-term efficacy between EBD and PTBD for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) rate, and secondary end points included postoperative severe complications and seeding metastasis. Effect size on outcomes was calculated using a fixed- or random-effect model, accompanied with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultSix studies were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that EBD was superior to PTBD in OS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.84,P= 0.0002). But subgroup results showed that the superiority disappeared in distal cholangiocarcinoma (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.01,P= 0.06). Other prognostic factors such as intraoperative blood transfusion, lymphatic metastasis and seeding metastasis, were inconsistent between groups. In addition, regional disparity was obviously apparent between Japanese and non-Japanese studies.
conclusionThe conclusion that EBD was superior to PTBD in OS for resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction is less convincing, and more trials need to be conducted in future.
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.