ArticleClinical endoscopy2019
Efficacy of Nasobiliary Tubes and Biliary Stents in Management of Patients with Bile Leak after Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic management of bile duct leaks: Current strategies and controversies.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Application of percutaneous biliary drainage in the treatment of post-operative bile leakage after liver rupture: A case report.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2025Article
- Optimal timing of endoscopic biliary drainage for bile duct leaks: A multicenter, retrospective, clinical study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Lesson learnt from 60 years of liver transplantation: Advancements, challenges, and future directions.World journal of transplantation · 2025Review
- A nomogram for prediction of ERCP success in patients with bile duct leaks: a multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Complications in Post-Liver Transplant Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Nasobiliary drainage: an effective treatment for pruritus in cholestatic liver disease.Frontline gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Biliary Complications Following Adult Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation: Risk Factors and Implications at a High-volume US Center.Transplantation direct · 2021Article
- The Need for a Better-Designed Study of the Outcomes of Endoscopic Management of Bile Leak.Clinical endoscopy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsBile leak is one of the most common complications of liver transplantation. The treatment options for bile leaks include conservative management, surgical re-intervention, percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage. We aimed to perform a systematic review to identify the efficacy of endoscopic treatment in the resolution of post-transplant bile leaks.
methodsTwo independent reviewers performed systematic literature search in PubMed, ISI Web of Science, grey literature and relevant references in May 2017. Human studies in English with documented post-liver transplant bile leaks were included.
resultsThirty-four studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled efficacy of biliary stents for the resolution of post-transplant bile leaks was 82.43% compared with 87.15% efficacy of nasobiliary tubes. The efficacy of biliary stents was lower for anastomotic leaks (69.23%) compared to T-tube (90.9%) or cut-surface/ cystic duct stump related leaks (92.8%). Similarly, the efficacy of nasobiliary tube was also lower for anastomotic leaks (58.33%) compared to T-tube or cut-surface related leaks (100%).
conclusionIn this systematic review, the overall efficacy was 82.43% in biliary stent group, and 87.15% in nasobiliary tube group. Both biliary stent and nasobiliary tube were more effective in managing non-anastomotic leaks compared to anastomotic leaks.
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.