ArticleDEN open2023
Removal of Duckbill-type laser-cut anti-reflux metal stents: Clinical evaluation and in vitro study.
Article in DEN open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Successful removal of a biliary metal stent using the stent-in-stent-in-stent technique.Endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Duckbill-type metal stent (DMS) was the first laser-cut biliary metal stent with an anti-reflux valve. Removal of DMS is believed to be difficult and relevant reports are scarce. This study aims to investigate the feasibility of DMS removal. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent DMS removal between June 2019 and March 2022 to evaluate success rates and factors affecting outcomes. In addition, six different methods of DMS removal were reproduced in vitro, varying removal devices, angle of applied force, and grasped location. Extraction resistance, the distance of forceps stroke, and stent length after removal were compared. Results: Forty patients were enrolled, and DMS removal was successful in 31 cases (78%). No adverse events were observed. Tumor ingrowth was evident in 78% (7/9) of failed cases. Patients receiving biliary metal stents for the first time (naïve cases), long indwelling time, longer stent, and stent tearing during removal were associated with unsuccessful stent removal. In the in vitro study, a larger force was required to remove the stent at an extraction angle of 120° than at 0°. Among cases in which force was applied at 120°, the load tended to be lower when rat-tooth forceps were applied horizontally across the stent. Conclusions: Stent removal was possible in a majority of cases. Deployment of additional stents inside DMS may be preferable to forceful removal in the presence of factors associated with difficult stent removals, such as tumor ingrowth, naïve cases, longer stents, long indwelling time, and stent tearing during removal.
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.