Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37952017›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2024

Comparison Between Plastic and Metallic Biliary Stent Placement for Preoperative Patients with Pancreatic Head Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Yutaka Endo, Masayuki Tanaka, Minoru Kitago, Hiroshi Yagi, Yuta Abe, Yasushi Hasegawa, Shutaro Hori, Yutaka Nakano, Eisuke Iwasaki, Yuko Kitagawa

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Impact of Stent Type on Surgical Outcomes in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Undergoing Preoperative Biliary Drainage.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Role of Endoscopy in Malignant Biliary Obstruction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Yutaka EndoDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Masayuki TanakaDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan. masa_psg@keio.jp.
Minoru KitagoDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Hiroshi YagiDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuta AbeDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yasushi HasegawaDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Shutaro HoriDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yutaka NakanoDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Eisuke IwasakiDepartments of Internal Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuko KitagawaDepartments of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan.
Keio University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptimal preoperative biliary drainage for patients with pancreatic cancer before pancreatoduodenectomy remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the comparison of efficacy and safety between a metallic stent (MS) and a plastic stent (PS).

methodsComparative studies on the use of MS and PS for pancreatic cancer before pancreatoduodenectomy were systematically searched using the MEDLINE and Web of Science databases. Pre- and postoperative data also were extracted. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to compare post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications as well as intra- and postoperative outcomes between the two arms of the study, and pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) were calculated with 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs).

resultsThe study analyzed 12 studies involving 683 patients. Insertion of MS was associated with a lower incidence of re-intervention (OR, 0.06; 95% CI 0.03-0.15; P < 0.001), increased post-ERCP adverse events (OR, 2.22; 95% CI 1.13-4.36; P = 0.02), and similar operation time (MD, 18.0 min; 95% CI -29.1 to 65.6 min; P = 0.46), amount of blood loss (MD, 43.0 ml; 95% CI -207.1 to 288.2 ml; P = 0.73), and surgical complication rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI 0.53-1.15; P = 0.21). The cumulative stent patency rate after 3 months was higher in the MS group than in the PS group (70-100 % vs 30.0-45.0 %).

conclusionFor biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic cancer during this era of multidisciplinary treatment, MS use might be the first choice because MS provides a more durable biliary drainage and a similar risk of postoperative outcomes compared with PS.

Indexed as

CholestasisPancreatic NeoplasmsCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeDrainageHumansPancreasStentsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID37952017
OpenAlexW4388588584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.