ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2021
Stent Applications for Palliative Treatment in Advanced Stage Esophageal Cancers.
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Anti-reflux versus conventional self-expanding metal stents in the palliation of esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Endoscopy international open · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
methodsWe examined cases of endoscopic stenting for palliative treatment of advanced stage esophageal cancers between January 2014 and July 2019. Age, gender, location of mass, adverse events, survival time, and stent type were evaluated. Outcomes of fully covered and uncovered self-expanding stents were compared with regard to adverse events, including stent migration and occlusion.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 66.4 ± 1, 52 were male, and 8 were female. Patients were followed up for a mean of 133 days. The most common complication due to stenting was migration. 13 patients developed adverse events. Migration was the most common adverse event, occurring in 8 (13%) patients. Although the migration rate of fully covered stents was higher than uncovered stents, there was no statistically significant difference (
conclusionEndoscopic stenting is a viable palliative method with low morbidity and mortality in experienced centers. Though there are relative advantages with covered versus uncovered stents in individual cases, the overall adverse event rate is low and relatively similar.
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.