Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31823862›Full record

ReviewSaudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association

Lumen-apposing metal stents in management of pancreatic fluid collections: The nobody's land of removal timing.

Claudio Giovanni De Angelis, Ludovica Venezia, Pablo Cortegoso Valdivia, Stefano Rizza, Mauro Bruno, Rinaldo Pellicano

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Advancements in the endoscopic treatment of pancreatic fluid collections.Chronic diseases and translational medicine · 2020
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Claudio Giovanni De AngelisDepartment of Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.
Ludovica VeneziaDepartment of Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Turin, City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.
Pablo Cortegoso ValdiviaDepartment of Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Turin, City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.
Stefano RizzaDepartment of Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, University of Turin, City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.
Mauro BrunoDepartment of Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.
Rinaldo PellicanoDepartment of Medical Sciences, Gastroenterology Unit, City of Health and Science, Turin, Italy.
Department of Medical Sciences · BYUniversity of Turin · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) develop as a result of damage to the major or peripheral pancreatic ducts, complication due to acute or chronic pancreatitis, trauma or iatrogenic causes. PFCs include pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) and walled-off necrosis (WON). PFCs usually resolve spontaneously and are asymptomatic, but if they persist, increase in dimension or became symptomatics, therapeutic intervention is required. Available therapeutic interventions include surgical, percutaneous, and endoscopic drainage. The endoscopic approach is nowadays considered the first line-treatment of PFCs due to various advantages when compared with surgical or percutaneous drainage: decreased morbidity, length of hospital stay, and reduced costs. In the last few years, the endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage, initially with plastic stents, gained popularity. More recently, fully covered self-expanding lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have been demonstrated to be both, safe and effective with high clinical and technical success, reducing the risk of perforation, peritoneal leakage, migration and facilitating the drainage of necrotic contents. In the last few years, several studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of LAMS and their differences with plastic stents have been performed, but literature on the removal timing of this device and associated complications is still limited. The aim of this review is to analyze studies reporting information about the retrieval timing of LAMS and the related adverse events.

Indexed as

Body FluidsDevice RemovalDrainageEndoscopyEndosonographyFemaleHumansMaleMetalsNecrosisOutcome Assessment, Health CarePancreatic JuicePancreatic PseudocystPancreatitisStentsTreatment OutcomeMetalsEUSEUS-guided drainagelumen apposing metal stentpancreatic fluid collectionpancreatic pseudocystremoval timingwalled-off necrosis

Identifiers

PMID31823862
PMCPMC6941461
OpenAlexW2991667741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.