ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2019
Management of acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant obstruction: comparison of percutaneous gallbladder drainage and aspiration.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cholecystitis: A review of incidence, risk factors, prevention, and management.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Treatment Strategy for Acute Cholecystitis Induced by a Metallic Stent Placed in Malignant Biliary Strictures: Role of Percutaneous Transhepatic Gallbladder Aspiration.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
- Article
- How should a therapeutic strategy be constructed for acute cholecystitis after self-expanding metal stent placement for malignant biliary obstruction?Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Percutaneous cholecystostomy as a definitive treatment for moderate and severe acute acalculous cholecystitis: a retrospective observational study.BMC surgery · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes between percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD) and percutaneous gallbladder aspiration (PGBA) for acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant biliary obstruction. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-six and 14 patients underwent PGBD and PGBA, respectively, for acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant obstruction. The technical success rate, clinical effectiveness, and safety were compared between the 2 groups.
resultsTechnical success was achieved in all patients. Clinical effectiveness rate was significantly higher in the PGBD group than in the PGBA group [100% (26/26) vs. 57% (8/14), p < 0.01]. In the PGBA group, clinical effectiveness rate was significantly lower in patients with tumor involvement of the cystic duct [13% (1/8) with involvement vs. 83% (5/6) without involvement, p = 0.03]. There were no deaths related to the procedure or acute cholecystitis aggravation. Pleural effusion and biliary peritonitis occurred in 1 patient each after PGBD and intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in 1 patient after PGBA as complications requiring treatment.
conclusionAlthough PGBD was a more effective treatment for acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant obstruction, PGBA may be a less invasive option for high-risk patients without tumor involvement of the cystic duct.
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.