Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32126740›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2020

Inside Plastic Stents versus Metal Stents for Treating Unresectable Malignant Perihilar Biliary Obstructions: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Yoshihide Kanno, Shinsuke Koshita, Takahisa Ogawa, Hiroaki Kusunose, Kaori Masu, Toshitaka Sakai, Keisuke Yonamine, Kazuaki Miyamoto, Toji Murabayashi, Fumisato Kozakai and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yoshihide KannoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Shinsuke KoshitaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Takahisa OgawaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Hiroaki KusunoseDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Kaori MasuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Toshitaka SakaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Keisuke YonamineDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Kazuaki MiyamotoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Toji MurabayashiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Fumisato KozakaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Jun HoraguchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Yutaka NodaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Kei ItoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Sendai City Medical Center, Sendai, Japan.
Sendai Medical Center · JPSendai National College of Technology · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsThe aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of inside plastic stents (iPSs) versus those of metal stents (MSs) for treating unresectable perihilar malignant obstructions.

methodsFor all patients who underwent endoscopic suprapapillary placement of iPS(s) or MS(s) as the first permanent biliary drainage for unresectable malignant perihilar obstructions between January 2014 and August 2019, clinical outcomes using iPSs (n=20) and MSs (n=85), including clinical efficacy, adverse events, and time to recurrence of biliary obstruction (RBO), were retrospectively evaluated.

resultsThere were no differences in clinical effectiveness (95% for the iPS group vs. 92% for the MS group, p=1.00). Procedure-related adverse events, including pancreatitis, acute cholangitis, acute cholecystitis, and death, were observed for 8% of the MS group, although no patient in the iPS group developed such adverse events. The median time to RBO was 561 days (95% confidence interval, 0-1,186 days) for iPSs and 209 days (127-291 days) for MSs, showing a significant difference (p=0.008).

conclusionTime to RBO after iPS placement was significantly longer than that after MS placement. IPSs, which are removable, unlike MSs, were an acceptable option.

Indexed as

Above the papillaBenign strictureBile duct cancerEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyHilar cholangiocarcinoma

Identifiers

PMID32126740
PMCPMC7719412
OpenAlexW3009121531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.