ArticleJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology2020
The Evolution of EUS-Guided Transluminal Drainage for the Treatment of Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Comparison of Clinical and Cost Outcomes with Double-Pigtail Plastic Stents, Conventional Metal Stents and Lumen-Apposing Metal Stents.
Article in Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Different Stent Types for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Lumen-apposing metal stents versus traditional self-expanding metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Pooled it
- Multicenter study of the efficacy and safety of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents for the internal drainage of pancreatic fluid collections.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Safety and efficacy of early versus late removal of LAMS for pancreatic fluid collections.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Surgical management of acute pancreatitis: Historical perspectives, challenges, and current management approaches.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Review
- Asparaginase-associated Pancreatitis Complicated by Pancreatic Fluid Collection Treated with Endoscopic Cistogastrostomy in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Case Report and Systematic Review of the Literature.Clinical hematology international · 2023Article
- Performance Characteristics of a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent for Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Equivalent efficacy and safety of plastic stents and lumen-apposing metal stents in the treatment of peripancreatic fluid collections: a prospective cohort study.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile most pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) resolve spontaneously, endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage (EUS-TD) may be necessary. EUS-TD has evolved from multiple double-pigtail plastic stents (DPPS) to fully covered self-expanding metal stents (FCSEMS) and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS). This study compares clinical attributes of DPPS, FCSEMS and LAMS.
methodsThis is a single-centre retrospective review of EUS-TD for PFCs. The primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes were technical success, procedure time, hospital length of stay (HLOS), number of endoscopies, need for necrosectomy, adverse events (AEs) and overall cost.
resultsFifty-eight patients (37 male, average age 49 years) underwent a total of 60 EUS-TD procedures for PFCs (average size 11.2 cm with 29 pseudocysts and 29 walled-off necrosis). Ten patients (17%) underwent EUS-TD with DPPS and 48 patients (83%) with metal stents (32 FCSEMS, 16 LAMS). Overall technical and clinical success was 100% and 84%, respectively. Lumen-apposing metal stents had shorter procedure times (14.9 versus 63.6 DPPS, 39.1 min FCSEMS,
conclusionThe use of LAMS for PFCs is not associated with any significant increase in cost despite technical (shorter procedure time) and clinical advantages (shorter indwell time, reduced need for necrosectomy and no increase in AEs).
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.