ReviewJournal of minimal access surgery
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage to abdominal abscess: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic incision and debridement for presumed delayed postoperative anastomotic submucosal abscess of the rectum: a case report.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- EUS-guided drainage for pelvic abscesses: a Chinese single-center two-year follow-up study highlighting clinical outcomes.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Real-time Fluoroscopic Fusion Imaging Guidance Using Angio-computed Tomography for Percutaneous Drainage of a Difficult-to-access Liver Abscess: A Case Report.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2026Article
- Rare submucosal abscess following endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal polyps: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of a prevertebral neck abscess: a case report.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transrectal drainage of deep pelvic abscesses is safe and effective in children.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasonography: Advances in Application.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Endoscopic Drainage of Intra-abdominal Fluid Collections and Abscesses.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2024Review
- Special stent for draining the abdominal abscess respectively from colon and duodenum: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Transrectal Pelvic Abscess Drainage (EUS-PAD) - Bridging to Surgery: Report of Two Cases.Surgery journal (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- A rare presentation of subphrenic abscess caused byMedicine internationalArticle
- Delayed Perforation of Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Treated by Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Drainage.Case reports in 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ultrasound (US)- or computed tomography-guided drainage for abdominal abscess is currently the first-line options for drainage, but both options have disadvantages. Patients without adequate windows for drainage mostly undergo surgical drainage. However, surgical drainage is invasive and expensive. Endoscopic US (EUS)-guided drainage is a minimally invasive alternative for abdominal abscess, but there is less consensus on its efficacy, safety and complications. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate EUS-guided drainage for abdominal abscess. Materials and Methods: We retrieved relevant papers on EUS-guided drainage for abdominal abscess from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE databases. Each paper was reviewed, and data were extracted. We used R software version 3.6.3 to perform the meta-analysis. Fixed effects models were used for merging data. Results: A total of 11 papers met the inclusion criteria, with a total sample population of 264 patients. The meta-analysis showed that the pooled clinical success rate was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.95), the technical success rate was 99% (95% CI, 0.97-1.00) and the recurrence rate was 1% (95% CI, 0.00-0.03). Three studies reported the complications, including perforation, bleeding and stent migration; none of the other eight studies reported complications. There were no significant differences between subgroups. There was no publication bias in either the clinical or the technical success rates. Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that EUS-guided drainage for abdominal abscess was effective and safe, with an excellent technical success rate. In addition, EUS-guided drainage could be used for abscesses with complex anatomy. Nevertheless, complications and stent type should be considered.
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.