ReviewCureus2023
Malignant Airway Obstruction and Endobronchial Stent Placement: A Systematic Review on the Efficacy and Safety.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human airway material characterization via inverse finite element analysis and neural network surrogate.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2026Article
- Treatment of Malignant Tracheobronchial Stenosis with Y-Shaped Stent: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endobronchial stent placement for malignant airway obstruction. A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases to identify relevant studies. Cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, and case-control studies examining the outcomes of endobronchial stent placement in patients with malignant airway obstruction were included. Data on pre-treatment evaluation, such as pulmonary function testing, dyspnea severity scoring systems, arterial blood gas parameters, imaging, and degree of obstruction, were also collected. Primary outcomes of interest included post-procedure stenosis, pulmonary function testing evaluation, blood gas parameters, and survival outcomes. Secondary outcomes encompassed improvements in clinical status, dyspnea grade, and procedure-related complications. A total of 27 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. The included studies demonstrated promising outcomes of endobronchial stent placement in managing malignant airway obstruction. Post-procedure airway diameters, pulmonary function testing, and blood gas parameters improved significantly. Survival outcomes varied among studies. Furthermore, endobronchial stent placement was associated with improvements in clinical status and dyspnea grade. Procedure-related complications ranged from pain, hemoptysis and mucus plugging to stent obstruction, migration and pneumothorax. This systematic review suggests that endobronchial stent placement is an effective and safe intervention for managing malignant airway obstruction. It offers significant improvements in post-procedure stenosis, pulmonary function testing, blood gas parameters, and clinical outcomes. However, further studies with larger sample sizes and standardized reporting are warranted to better evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of endobronchial stent placement for malignant airway obstruction.
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.