ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
Mishaps with EUS-guided lumen-apposing metal stents in therapeutic pancreatic EUS: Management and prevention.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidewire use in electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent procedures: Results of an online survey from an international working group.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- The Gastrointestinal Tract: A Unique Battlefield for Bioengineering Delivery Platforms.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Early intervention with rescue ERCP and pancreatic stenting for unanticipated post-ERCP pancreatitis: a comparative study.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Endoscopic management of infected necrotizing pancreatitis: Advancing through standardization.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct drainage: Progress and future outlook.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- An international survey on the geographical differences in practice patterns and training of endoscopic ultrasound.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Advanced Endoscopic Stents for Pancreatic Pseudocyst Drainage: A 2-Year Study.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 13 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EUS-guided interventions have become widely accepted therapeutic management options for drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections. Apart from endosonographic skills, EUS interventions require knowledge of the endoscopic stenting techniques and familiarity with the available stents and deployment systems. Although generally safe and effective, technical failure of correct stent positioning or serious adverse events can occur, even in experts' hands. In this article, we address common and rare adverse events in transmural EUS-guided stenting, ways to prevent them, and management options when they occur. Knowing the risks of what can go wrong combined with clinical expertise, high levels of technical skills, and adequate training allows for the safe performance of EUS-guided drainage procedures. Discussing the procedural risks and their likelihood with the patient is a fundamental part of the consenting process.
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.