Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36537387›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy in patients with obstructive jaundice after failed or impossible endoscopic retrograde drainage: A multicenter, randomized phase II Study.

Mariola Marx, Fabrice Caillol, Aurélie Autret, Jean-Philippe Ratone, Christophe Zemmour, Jean Marie Boher, Christian Pesenti, Erwan Bories, Marc Barthet, Bertrand Napoléon and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainageWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mariola MarxDivision of Gastroenterology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Fabrice CaillolDivision of Gastroenterology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Aurélie AutretDivision of Biostatistics, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Jean-Philippe RatoneDivision of Gastroenterology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Christophe ZemmourDivision of Biostatistics, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Jean Marie BoherDivision of Biostatistics, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Christian PesentiDivision of Gastroenterology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Erwan BoriesDivision of Gastroenterology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Marc BarthetDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Hôpital Nord, Marseille, France.
Bertrand NapoléonDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Hôpital Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France.
Marc GiovanniniDivision of Gastroenterology, Paoli-Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Institut Paoli-Calmettes · FRHôpital Nord · FRHôpital Privé Jean Mermo · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Over the last two decades, EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with biliary obstruction and failed ERCP. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) as the gold standard is associated with relevant morbidity and need for re-intervention. The aim of our work was to evaluate in a phase II study the safety and efficacy profile of EUS-HGS. A PTBD arm was considered a control group. Patients and Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, noncomparative phase II study in three French tertiary centers involving patients with benign or malignant obstructive jaundice after failure of ERCP. Patients were randomized to either PTBD or EUS-HGS. Results: Fifty-six patients (mean age 64 years) have been included between 2011 and 2015. Twenty-one underwent PTBD and thirty-five were drained using EUS-HGS. An interim analysis after the inclusion of 41 patients revealed an unexpected high 30-day morbidity rate for PTBD (13 out of 21 patients), justifying to stop randomization and inclusion in this control arm in 2013. The primary objective was reached with 10 out of the 35 EUS-HGS patients (28.6%) having observed complications (90%-level bilateral exact binomial confidence interval [CI] [16.4%-43.6%], left-sided exact binomial test to the objectified 50% unacceptable rate P = 0.0083). Both methods achieved comparable technical success rate (TSR) and clinical success rate (CSR) (TSR: PTBD 100% vs. EUS-HGS 94.3%, P = 0.28; CSR: PTBD 66.7% vs. EUS-HGS 80%, P = 0.35). Long-term follow-up showed EUS-HGS patients being at lower risk for re-intervention (relative risk = 0.47, 95% CI [0.27-0.83]). Conclusion: In cases of ERCP failure, EUS-HGS is a valuable alternative for biliary drainage with a high TSR and CSR. PTBD is associated with an unacceptable 30-day morbidity rate, whereas EUS-HGS seems to have a decent safety profile, suggesting that it may be the treatment of choice in appropriately selected patients.

Indexed as

biliary stentingEUShepaticogastrostomyobstructive jaundicepercutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage

Identifiers

PMID36537387
PMCPMC9921974
OpenAlexW4303519672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.