ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2023
Efficacy and safety of covered versus uncovered self‑expandable metal stents for the palliative treatment of malignant distal biliary stricture: A long‑term retrospective study.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Both covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMSs) and uncovered self-expandable metal stents (USEMSs) have been tried in the palliation of malignant distal biliary strictures by means of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, the comparison of efficacy and safety between them remains contested. To the best of our knowledge, no similar studies have assessed this in the Chinese population. In the present study, the clinical and endoscopic data of 238 patients (CSEMSs, n=55; USEMSs, n=183) with malignant distal biliary strictures from 2014 to 2019 were collected. The efficacy indicated by mean stent patency, stent patency rate, mean patient survival time and survival rate, and the safety indicated by adverse events after CSEMS or USEMS placement were retrospectively analyzed and compared. The mean stent patency time was significantly longer in the CSEMSs group than that in the USEMSs group (262.8±195.3 days vs. 169.5±155.7 days, P=0.002). The mean patient survival time was significantly longer in the CSEMSs group than that in the USEMSs group (273.9±197.6 days vs. 184.9±167.6 days, P=0.003). The stent patency rate and patient survival rate were significantly higher in the CSEMSs group than those in the USEMSs group at 6 and 12 months, but not at 1 and 3 months. There was no significant difference in stent dysfunction and adverse events between the two groups, although post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) occurred more frequently in the CSEMSs group than in the USEMSs group (18.1% vs. 8.8%, P=0.049). In conclusion, CSEMSs were better than USEMSs for malignant distal biliary strictures in terms of stent patency time and patient survival time as well as stent patency rate and patient survival rate in the long term (>6 months). Adverse events in the two groups occurred at a similar rate, although the incidence of PEP was higher in the CSEMSs group.
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.