Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36861509›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

EUS-guided biliary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction: An international survey to identify barriers of technology implementation.

Vincent Palmieri, Alan Barkun, Nauzer Forbes, Myriam Martel, Eric Lam, Jennifer Telford, Gurpal Sandha, Sarto Paquin, Anand Sahai, Yen-I Chen

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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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 6 institutions in 1 country.

Vincent PalmieriDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Alan BarkunDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Nauzer ForbesDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Myriam MartelDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Eric LamDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St-Paul's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Jennifer TelfordDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St-Paul's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Gurpal SandhaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Alberta Hospital, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Sarto PaquinDivision of Gastroenterology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Anand SahaiDivision of Gastroenterology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Yen-I ChenDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
McGill University Health Centre · CACentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CASt. Paul's Hospital · CAUniversity of Alberta Hospital · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a promising alternative to ERCP in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). Despite accumulating data, however, its application in clinical practice has been impeded by undefined barriers. This study aims to evaluate the practice of EUS-BD and its barriers. Methods: An online survey was generated using Google Forms. Six gastroenterology/endoscopy associations were contacted between July 2019 and November 2019. Survey questions measured participant characteristics, EUS-BD in different clinical scenarios, and potential barriers. The primary outcome was the uptake of EUS-BD as a first-line modality, without previous ERCP attempts, in patients with MDBO. Results: Overall, 115 respondents completed the survey (2.9% response rate). Respondents were from North America (39.2%), Asia (28.6%), Europe (20%), and other jurisdictions (12.2%). Regarding the uptake of EUS-BD as first-line treatment for MDBO, only 10.5% of respondents would consider EUS-BD as a first-line modality regularly. The main concerns were the lack of high-quality data, fear of adverse events, and limited access to EUS-BD dedicated devices. On multivariable analysis, lack of access to EUS-BD expertise was an independent predictor against the use of EUS-BD, odds ratio 0.16 (95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.65). In salvage situations following failed ERCP, most favored EUS-BD (40.9%) over percutaneous drainage (21.7%) in unresectable cancer. In borderline resectable or locally advanced disease, however, most favored the percutaneous approach due to fear of EUS-BD complicating future surgery. Conclusions: EUS-BD has not reached widespread clinical adoption. Identified barriers include lack of high-quality data, fear of adverse events, and lack of access to EUS-BD dedicated devices. Fear of complicating future surgery was also identified as a barrier in potentially resectable disease.

Indexed as

EUSEUS-guided biliary drainagemalignant biliary obstructionpancreatic cancerstenttherapeutic EUS

Identifiers

PMID36861509
PMCPMC10134941
OpenAlexW4303513309

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.