ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021
Comparative Efficacy of Various Stents for Palliation in Patients with Malignant Extrahepatic Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of Endoscopy in Malignant Biliary Obstruction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Nutritional-Inflammatory Recovery After Metal versus Plastic Biliary Stenting in Elderly Cholangiocarcinoma: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Observational
- Article
- Palliative management for malignant biliary obstruction and gastric outlet obstruction from pancreatic cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Review
- Biliary stents for active materials and surface modification: Recent advances and future perspectives.Bioactive materials · 2024Review
- National guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- The past, present, and future of endoscopic management for biliary strictures: technological innovations and stent advancements.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Adult female with intermittent epigastric pain.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2023Article
- Efficacy Analysis of Suprapapillary versus Transpapillary Self-Expandable Metal Stents According to the Level of Obstruction in Malignant Extrahepatic Biliary Obstruction.Gut and liver · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of a new approach to minimally invasive surgery in palliative treatment of patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Biliary Stent Types' Outcome and Complications in Unresectable Malignant Biliary Obstructions.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Article
- Outcomes of Different Guidewire-Assisted Techniques for Recurrent Malignant Biliary Obstruction After Uncovered Metallic Stent Placement.Journal of digestive diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although many studies have investigated the efficacy of stent placement for patients with malignant extrahepatic biliary obstruction, the clinical outcomes and adverse events of biliary stenting have not been comprehensively evaluated. We searched all relevant randomized-controlled trials that evaluated the comparative efficacy of biliary stents, including the plastic stents, uncovered self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), and covered SEMSs in patients with malignant extrahepatic biliary obstructions. Twenty-one studies with 2326 patients were included. Both uncovered and covered SEMSs had a lower risk of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) compared to plastic stents (risk ratio (RR) (95% confidence interval [CI]): uncovered vs. plastic, 0.46 (0.35-0.62); covered vs. plastic, 0.46 (0.34-0.62)). A comparison of the groups using SEMSs revealed that tumor ingrowth was common in the uncovered SEMS group, while stent migration, tumor overgrowth, and occlusion by sludge were common in the covered SEMS group; however, the overall risk of RBO did not differ between these groups (RR (95% CI): uncovered vs. covered: 1.02 (0.80-1.30)). Although the main causes of RBO vary across stents, RBO risk was similar between uncovered and covered SEMS groups. Both SEMSs have superior efficacy in terms of RBO compared to plastic stents.
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.