ArticleGastroenterology report2020
Outcomes of a single-step endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections using an electrocautery-enhanced coaxial lumen-apposing, self-expanding metal stent with and without fluoroscopy.
Article in Gastroenterology report, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation of Advanced Endoscopic Stents for Pancreatic Pseudocyst Drainage: A 2-Year Study.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Article
- Necrotizing Pancreatitis Infected withCase reports in gastrointestinal medicine · 2023Article
- Clinical application and follow-up of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided interventions.Annals of medicine · 2023Review
- Controversies in EUS-guided treatment of walled-off necrosis.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFluoroscopy is often used during the endoscopic drainage of pancreatic-fluid collections (PFCs). An electrocautery-enhanced coaxial lumen-apposing, self-expanding metal stent (ELAMS) facilitates a single-step procedure and may avoid the need for fluoroscopy. This study compares the treatment outcomes using ELAMS with and without fluoroscopy.
methodsPatients with PFCs who had cystogastrostomy from January 2014 to February 2017 were enrolled. Two groups were studied based on fluoroscopy use. Technical success was defined as uneventful insertion of ELAMS at time of procedure. Clinical success was defined as (i) clinical resolution of symptoms after the procedure and (ii) >75% reduction in cyst size on computed tomography 8 weeks after stent placement. Adverse events including bleeding, stent migration, and infection were recorded.
resultsA total of 21 patients (13 males) had PFCs drainage with ELAMS in the study period. The mean age was 51.6 ± 14.2 years. Thirteen patients had walled-off necrosis while eight had a pancreatic pseudocyst. The mean size of the PFCs was 11.3 ± 3.3 cm. Fluoroscopy was used in seven cases (33%) and was associated with a longer procedure time compared to non-fluoroscopy (43.1 ± 10.4 vs 33.3 ± 10.5 min,
conclusionsELAMS may avoid the need for fluoroscopy during cystogastrostomy. Procedures without fluoroscopy were significantly shorter and fluoroscopy use had no impact on the technical or clinical success rates.
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.