Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36751758›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided biliary drainage for benign biliary obstruction - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Faisal Kamal, Muhammad Ali Khan, Wade Lee-Smith, Sachit Sharma, Ashu Acharya, Umer Farooq, Zahid Ijaz Tarar, Alec E Faggen, Muhammad Aziz, Saurabh Chandan and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
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

15 authors.

Faisal KamalDivision of Gastroenterology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Muhammad Ali KhanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Wade Lee-SmithMulford Health Sciences Library, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Sachit SharmaDivision of Gastroenterology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Department of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Ashu AcharyaDepartment of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Umer FarooqDepartment of Medicine, Loyola Medicine/MacNeal Hospital, Berwyn, IL, USA.
Zahid Ijaz TararDepartment of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.
Alec E FaggenDivision of Gastroenterology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Muhammad AzizDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Saurabh ChandanDivision of Gastroenterology, Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Zohaib AhmedDepartment of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA.
Abdul KouandaDivision of Gastroenterology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Sun-Chuan DaiDivision of Gastroenterology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Craig A MunroeDivision of Gastroenterology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Douglas G AdlerCenter for Advanced Therapeutic Endoscopy, Porter Adventist Hospital, Denver, Colorado, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: ERCP is the first line of treatment for benign and malignant biliary obstruction and EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is usually used for patients who have failed ERCP. Recently, several studies have evaluated the role of EUS-BD in the management of benign biliary obstruction. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in the management of benign biliary obstruction. Methods: We reviewed several databases from inception to July 8, 2022, to identify studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of EUS-BD in the management of benign biliary obstruction. Our outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. Pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all outcomes were calculated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed including patients with normal anatomy versus surgically altered anatomy (SAA). Heterogeneity was assessed by I Results: We included 14 studies with 329 patients. The pooled rate (95% CI) of technical success was 88% (83%, 92%). The pooled rate (95% CI) of technical success for patients with SAA and normal anatomy was 92% (85%, 96%) and 83% (75%, 89%), respectively. The pooled rates (95% CI) of clinical success and adverse events were 89% (83%, 93%) and 19% (13%, 26%), respectively. We found low heterogeneity in most of the analyses. Conclusions: EUS-BD is an effective and safe option in patients with benign biliary obstruction and should be considered after a failed attempt at ERCP or when ERCP is not technically possible.

Indexed as

Benign biliary obstructionendoscopic ultrasoundmeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID36751758
PMCPMC10237615

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.