Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32481299›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

The methods of preoperative biliary drainage for resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.

Guo-Feng Chen, Wei-Di Yu, Ji-Ru Wang, Fu-Zhen Qi, Yu-Dong Qiu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Guo-Feng ChenDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.
Wei-Di YuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Affiliated Shanghai No. 10 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Shanghai, Shanghai Province.ORCID 0000-0001-5200-8459
Ji-Ru WangDepartment of Health and Rehabilitation, Jiangsu College of Nursing, Huai'an, Jiangsu Province, P.R. China.
Fu-Zhen QiDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Affiliated Huai'an NO.1 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Huai'an, Jiangsu Province.
Yu-Dong QiuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province.
Xuzhou Medical College · CNJiangsu Food and Pharmaceutical Science College · CNNanjing Drum Tower Hospital · CNNanjing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the clinical outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) with those of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) and evaluate the effect of EBD and PTBD on tumor prognosis. MATERIALS AND

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles about the comparison between PTBD and EBD. Data were analyzed by Revman 5.3.

resultsPTBD showed a lower risk of drainage-related complications than EBD (OR, 2.73; 95%CI, 1.52-4.91; P < .05). PTBD was also associated with lower risk of pancreatitis (OR, 8.47; 95%CI, 2.28-31.45; P < .05). The differences in preoperative cholangitis, R0 resection, blood loss and recurrence showed no statistically significance between EBD and PTBD (all P > .05). Several literatures have reported the tumor implantation metastasis after PTBD. Since no well-designed prospective randomized controlled studies have explored in this depth, this article is unable to draw conclusions on this aspect.

conclusionPTBD is a reasonable choice for PBD, and EBD should only be used as preoperative drainage for HCCA by more experienced physicians. There is a greater need to design prospective randomized controlled studies to obtain high-level evidence-based medicinal proof. It is worth noting that, whether EBD or PTBD, accurate selective biliary drainage should be the trend.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBile Duct NeoplasmsBlood Loss, SurgicalCase-Control StudiesCholangitisDrainageEndoscopyFemaleHumansIncidenceKlatskin TumorMaleMeta-Analysis as TopicMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID32481299
PMCPMC7249990
OpenAlexW3031712494

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.