SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2023
SX-ELLA biodegradable stent for benign oesophageal strictures: a systematic review and proportion meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- SX-ELLA biodegradable stent for benign oesophageal strictures: a systematic review and proportion meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Biodegradable and self-expanding metal stents in the treatment of children with strictures after esophageal atresia repair.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2026Article
- Innovative endoscopic alternatives for the conservative management of recurrent/refractory esophageal strictures in children: A case series.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Comprehensive review of materials, applications, and future innovations in biodegradable esophageal stents.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis systematic review aimed to analyse the use of the SX-ELLA biodegradable stent (BDS) for benign oesophageal strictures through the assessment of clinical and technical success, differences in pre- and post-BDS insertion dysphagia scores, rates of stent migration, and safety.
methodsA systematic review was reported according to PRISMA guidelines, with a prospectively registered protocol. The databases PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to March 2022. Studies assessing the use of the SX-ELLA BDS in adults with benign oesophageal strictures were included. A pooled data analysis was conducted to analyse the clinical and technical success associated with BDS use, rate of stent migration, and safety.
resultsOf the 1509 articles identified, 16 studies treating 246 patients were eligible for inclusion. BDS was clinically successful in 41.9% of cases (95% CI = 35.7 - 48.1%), defined as those who experienced complete symptom resolution following BDS insertion. Technical success was achieved in 97.2% of patients (95% CI = 95.1 - 99.3%). A pooled analysis concluded a decrease in mean dysphagia score of 1.8 points (95% CI = 1.68 - 1.91) following BDS insertion. Re-intervention was required in 89 patients (36.2%, 95% CI = 30.2 - 42.2%), whilst stent migration occurred in 6.5% of patients (95% CI = 3.4 - 9.6%). A total of 37 major clinical complications related to BDS insertion were reported (15.0%, 95% CI = 10.5 - 19.5%).
conclusionThe pooled data analysis demonstrates the high technical and moderate clinical success of the SX-ELLA biodegradable stent, supporting its use for benign oesophageal strictures in adults. However, greater evidence is required for more robust conclusions to be made in terms of success when compared to alternative methods of intervention, such as endoscopic dilation.
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.