Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34118136›Full record

ArticleJournal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences2021

Initial experience of endoscopic ultrasound-guided antegrade covered stent placement with long duodenal extension for malignant distal biliary obstruction (with video).

Hoonsub So, Dongwook Oh, Mamoru Takenaka, Kosuke Minaga, Shinya Uemura, Takuji Iwashita, Tomotaka Saito, Yousuke Nakai, Seon Ok Kim, Do Hyun Park

Open access · hybridAbstract readVideo-Audio Media
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Hoonsub SoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, South Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8092-2811
Dongwook OhDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Mamoru TakenakaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka-Sayama, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7308-4311
Kosuke MinagaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka-Sayama, Osaka, Japan.
Shinya UemuraDepartment of Internal Medicine, Gifu University Hospital, Gifu, Japan.
Takuji IwashitaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Gifu University Hospital, Gifu, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4978-1787
Tomotaka SaitoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yousuke NakaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7411-1385
Seon Ok KimDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Do Hyun ParkDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Ulsan College · KRGifu University Hospital · JPKindai University Hospital · JPThe University of Tokyo · JP

Funding

Korea Medical Device Development Fund 999100693Korea Medical Device Development Fund KMDF_PR_20200901_0266
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background/purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided antegrade covered stent placement with long duodenal extension (EASL) for malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) with duodenal obstruction (DO) or surgically altered anatomy (SAA) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

methodsOutcomes were technical and clinical success, reintervention rate, adverse events, stent patency, and overall survival. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and competing-risk analysis were performed to compare with conventional EUS-BD.

resultsTwenty-five patients (DO, n = 18; SAA, n = 7) were included. The technical and clinical success rates were 96% and 84%, respectively. Reintervention occurred in two patients (8.3%). Adverse events occurred in six patients (24%; two cholangitis, 16%; four mild postprocedural pancreatitis [24% (n = 4/17) in patients with non-pancreatic cancers]). The median patency was 9.4 months, and the overall survival was 2.73 months. After IPTW adjustment, the median patency in the EASL (n = 25) and conventional EUS-BD (n = 29) were 10.1 and 6.5 months, respectively (P = .018).

conclusionsEASL has acceptable clinical outcomes with a low reintervention rate but higher rate of postprocedural pancreatitis in patients with non-pancreatic cancers. Randomized trials comparing EASL and conventional EUS-BD for MDBO with pancreatic cancers and DO/SAA after failed ERCP are needed to validate our findings.

Indexed as

CholestasisPancreatic NeoplasmsCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeDrainageEndosonographyHumansStentsUltrasonography, Interventionalduodenal obstructionEndoscopic ultrasoundEUS-guided biliary drainagemalignant biliary obstructionsurgically altered anatomy

Identifiers

PMID34118136
PMCPMC9290461
OpenAlexW3167038317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.