ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2023
Comparison of trans-gastric
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 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.
- Evolution of gallbladder drainage: a comprehensive review from percutaneous to endoscopic ultrasound-guided approaches.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients: A comprehensive review article.DEN open · 2026Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis: Should the endoscopic option become the status quo?World journal of gastrointestinal pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Review
- Gaps and insights toward evidence-based management for acute cholecystitis patients at high surgical risk.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is being increasingly used in practice (either as a bridge to cholecystectomy in high-risk patients or as destination therapy in non-surgical patients). Stents are used to create a conduit between the lumen of the gallbladder (GB) and the intestinal lumen through the gastric or enteric routes. Among the various types of stents used, cautery-enhanced lumen apposing metallic stents (LAMS) may be associated with fewer adverse events (AEs).
aimTo compare the clinical success, technical success, and rate of AEs between transgastric (TG) and trans-enteric [transduodenal (TD)/transjejunal (TJ)] approach to GB drainage. Further, we analyzed whether using cautery enhanced stents during EUS-GBD impacts the above parameters.
methodsStudy was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022319019) and comprehensive literature review was conducted. Manuscripts were reviewed for the data collection: Rate of AEs, clinical success, and technical success. Random effects model was utilized for the analysis.
resultsNo statistically significant difference in clinical and technical success between the TD/TJ and TG approaches (
conclusionAs per our study results, TD/TJ approach appears to be associated with lower rate of adverse events and comparable efficacy when compared to the TG approach for the EUS-GBD. Additionally, use of cautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-GBD is associated with a more favorable adverse event profile compared to cold LAMS. Though the approach chosen depends on several patient and physician factors, the above findings could help in deciding the ideal drainage route when both TG and TD/TJ approaches are feasible.
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.