Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36681067›Full record

SynthesisClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2023

Endoscopic Biliary Darinage (EBD) versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage (PTBD) for biliary drainage in patients with Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma (PCCA): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Caroline Flaksbaum Moll, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura, Igor Braga Ribeiro, Igor Mendoça Proença, Epifanio Silvino do Monte Junior, Sergio A Sánchez-Luna, Maria Fernanda Shinin Merchán, Josselyn Mariana Vera Intriago, Wanderley Marques Bernardo, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Ultrasound-Guided Interventions in the Biliary System.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Caroline Flaksbaum MollServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de MouraServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Igor Braga RibeiroServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Electronic address: igorbraga1@gmail.com.
Igor Mendoça ProençaServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Epifanio Silvino do Monte JuniorServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Sergio A Sánchez-LunaBasil I. Hirschowitz Endoscopic Center of Excellence, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, United States.
Maria Fernanda Shinin MerchánServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Josselyn Mariana Vera IntriagoServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Wanderley Marques BernardoServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de MouraServiço de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal, Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biliary drainage for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma (PCCA) can be performed either by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage (PTBD). To date there is no consensus about which method is preferred. Taking that into account, the aim of this study is to compare Endoscopic Biliary Drainage (EBD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma through a systematic review and metanalysis. A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases was performed. Evaluated outcomes included technical success, clinical success, post drainage complications (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and major complications), crossover, hospital length stay, and seeding metastases. Data extracted from the studies were used to calculate Mean Differences (MD). Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 2284 patients (EBD = 1239, PTBD = 1045). Considering resectable PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated lower rates of crossover (RD = 0.29; 95% CI 0.07‒0.51; p = 0.009 I² = 90%), post-drainage complications (RD = 0.20; 95% CI 0.06‒0.33; p < 0.0001; I² = 78%), and post-drainage pancreatitis (RD = 0.10; 95% CI 0.05‒0.16; p < 0.0001; I² = 64%). The EBD group presented reduced length of hospital stay (RD = -2.89; 95% CI -3.35 ‒ -2,43; p < 0.00001; I² = 42%). Considering palliative PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated a higher clinical success (RD = -0.19; 95% CI -0.27 ‒ -0.11; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%) and less post-drainage cholangitis (RD = 0.08; 95% CI 0.01‒0.15; p = 0.02; I² = 48%) when compared to the EBD group. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding: technical success, post-drainage bleeding, major post-drainage complications, and seeding metastases.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCholangitisKlatskin TumorPancreatitisBile Ducts, IntrahepaticChromonesDrainageHumansRetrospective Studies6-propylchromone-2-carboxylic acidChromonesBiliaryCholangiocarcinomaDrainage, CancerEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyKlatskinPercutaneous transhepatic biliary drainageStent

Identifiers

PMID36681067
PMCPMC10757298
OpenAlexW4317486311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.