Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31686158›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2020

Critical Appraisal of the Impact of Oesophageal Stents in the Management of Oesophageal Anastomotic Leaks and Benign Oesophageal Perforations: An Updated Systematic Review.

Sivesh K Kamarajah, James Bundred, Gary Spence, Andrew Kennedy, Bobby V M Dasari, Ewen A Griffiths

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Oesophagopleural fistula after pneumonectomy: A systematic review and case series.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Boerhaave Syndrome-Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Endoscopic vacuum therapy.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  13. Esophageal Stenting: How I Do It.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Sivesh K KamarajahDepartment of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle University NHS Foundation Trust Hospitals, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2748-0011
James BundredCollege of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Gary SpenceDivision of Gastroenterology and Surgery, Ulster Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK.
Andrew KennedyDepartment of Upper Gastro-Intestinal Surgery, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK.
Bobby V M DasariDepartment of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Ewen A GriffithsDepartment of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Area 6, 7th Floor, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2WBUK, UK. ewen.griffiths@uhb.nhs.uk.
Belfast Health and Social Care Trust · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham · GBUlster Hospital · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEndoscopic placement of oesophageal stents may be used in benign oesophageal perforation and oesophageal anastomotic leakage to control sepsis and reduce mortality and morbidity by avoiding thoracotomy. This updated systematic review aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of oesophageal stents in these two scenarios.

methodsA systematic literature search of all published studies reporting use of metallic and plastic stents in the management of post-operative anastomotic leaks, spontaneous and iatrogenic oesophageal perforations were identified. Primary outcomes were technical (deploying ≥ 1 stent to occlude site of leakage with no evidence of leakage of contrast within 24-48 h) and clinical success (complete healing of perforation or leakage by placement of single or multiple stents irrespective of whether the stent was left in situ or was removed). Secondary outcomes were stent migration, perforation and erosion, and mortality rates. Subgroup analysis was performed for plastic versus metallic stents and anastomotic leaks versus perforations separately.

resultsA total of 66 studies (n = 1752 patients) were included. Technical and clinical success rates were 96% and 87%, respectively. Plastic stents had significantly higher migration rates (24% vs 16%, p = 0.001) and repositioning (11% vs 3%, p < 0.001) and lower technical success (91% vs 95%, p = 0.032) than metallic stents. In patients with anastomotic leaks, plastic stents were associated with higher stent migration (26% vs 15%, p = 0.034), perforation (2% vs 0%, p = 0.013), repositioning (10% vs 0%, p < 0.001), and lower technical success (95% vs 100%, p = p = 0.002). In patients with perforations only, plastic stents were associated with significantly lower technical success (85% vs 99%, p < 0.001).

conclusionsCovered metallic oesophageal stents appear to be more effective than plastic stents in the management of oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage. However, quality of evidence of generally poor and high-quality randomised trial is needed to further evaluate best management option for oesophageal perforation and anastomotic leakage.

Indexed as

StentsAnastomotic LeakEsophageal PerforationEsophagusHumansMetalsPlasticsMetalsPlastics

Identifiers

PMID31686158
OpenAlexW2985177630

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.