Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37253160›Full record

ArticleDigestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society2024

Retrospective comparative study of new slim-delivery and conventional large-cell stents for stent-in-stent methods for hilar malignant biliary obstruction.

Kazunaga Ishigaki, Rintaro Fukuda, Yousuke Nakai, Go Endo, Kohei Kurihara, Kota Ishida, Shuichi Tange, Shinya Takaoka, Yurie Tokito, Yukari Suzuki and 13 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

23 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kazunaga IshigakiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Rintaro FukudaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yousuke NakaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7411-1385
Go EndoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8334-5746
Kohei KuriharaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Kota IshidaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Shuichi TangeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Shinya TakaokaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yurie TokitoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yukari SuzukiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroki OyamaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Sachiko KanaiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Tatsunori SuzukiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Yukiko ItoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Japanese Red Cross Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Tatsuya SatoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Ryunosuke HakutaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Kei SaitoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Tomotaka SaitoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Tsuyoshi HamadaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3937-2755
Naminatsu TakaharaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Suguru MizunoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Hirofumi KogureDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Mitsuhiro FujishiroDepartment of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4074-1140
The University of Tokyo · JPJapanese Red Cross Medical Center · JPNihon University · JPJapan Society of Chemotherapy · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEndoscopic management of unresectable hilar malignant biliary obstruction (HMBO) is technically challenging, and effectiveness of stent-in-stent using large-cell, metal stents was reported. A new, large-cell stent with a 6F tapered delivery system was recently developed. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of slim-delivery and conventional large-cell stents.

methodsThis was a multicenter retrospective comparative study of stent-in-stent methods using slim-delivery stents (Niti-S Large Cell SR Slim Delivery [LC slim-delivery]) and conventional stents (Niti-S large-cell D-type; LCD) for unresectable HMBO.

resultsEighty-three patients with HMBO were included; 31 LC slim-delivery and 52 LCD. Overall technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 90% in LC slim-delivery group and 98% and 88% in LCD group. Use of the LC slim-delivery was associated with shorter stent placement time in the multiple regression analysis, with a stent placement time of 18 and 23 min in LC slim-delivery and LCD groups, respectively. The early adverse event (AE) rate of LC slim-delivery was 10%, with no cholangitis or cholecystitis as compared to 23% in the LCD group. Recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rates and time to RBO were comparable between the two groups: 35% and 44%, and 8.5 and 8.0 months in LC slim-delivery and LCD groups, respectively. The major cause of RBO was tumor ingrowth (82%) in the LC slim-delivery group and sludge (43%) and ingrowth (48%) in LCD group.

conclusionStent-in-stent methods using LC slim-delivery shortened stent placement time with low early AE rates and comparable time to RBO in patients with HMBO.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCholangitisCholestasisHumansRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment Outcomehilar malignant biliary obstructionslim-delivery uncovered metallic stent

Identifiers

PMID37253160
PMCPMC12136279
OpenAlexW4378782245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.