Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38398115›Full record

ArticleCancers2024

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gastroenterostomy versus Enteral Stenting for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction: A Retrospective Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Maria Cristina Conti Bellocchi, Enrico Gasparini, Serena Stigliano, Daryl Ramai, Laura Bernardoni, Francesco Maria Di Matteo, Antonio Facciorusso, Luca Frulloni, Stefano Francesco Crinò

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy with wire endoscopic simplified technique: Move towards benign indications (with video).Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. EUS-guided gastroenterostomyEndoscopic ultrasound
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria Cristina Conti BellocchiDiagnostic and Interventional Endoscopy of Pancreas, The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi University Hospital, 37134 Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7813-1583
Enrico GaspariniDiagnostic and Interventional Endoscopy of Pancreas, The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi University Hospital, 37134 Verona, Italy.
Serena StiglianoUnit of Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy, Campus Bio Medico University, 00128 Rome, Italy.
Daryl RamaiGastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah Hospital, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Laura BernardoniDiagnostic and Interventional Endoscopy of Pancreas, The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi University Hospital, 37134 Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1712-4582
Francesco Maria Di MatteoUnit of Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy, Campus Bio Medico University, 00128 Rome, Italy.
Antonio FacciorussoGastroenterology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Foggia, 00161 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2107-2156
Luca FrulloniDiagnostic and Interventional Endoscopy of Pancreas, The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi University Hospital, 37134 Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7417-2655
Stefano Francesco CrinòDiagnostic and Interventional Endoscopy of Pancreas, The Pancreas Institute, G.B. Rossi University Hospital, 37134 Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4560-8741
Università Campus Bio-Medico · ITUniversity of Foggia · ITUniversity of Utah Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) using lumen apposing metal stent has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment for the management of malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). We aimed to compare EUS-GE with enteral stenting (ES) for the treatment of mGOO.

methodsPatients who underwent EUS-GE or ES for mGOO between June 2017 and June 2023 at two Italian centers were retrospectively identified. The primary outcome was stent dysfunction. Secondary outcomes included technical success, clinical failure, safety, and hospital length of stay. A propensity score-matching analysis was performed using multiple covariates.

resultsOverall, 198 patients were included (66 EUS-GE and 132 ES). The stent dysfunction rate was 3.1% and 16.9% following EUS-GE and ES, respectively (

conclusionEUS-GE offers lower rates of stent dysfunction, longer stent patency, and shorter hospital stay compared with ES.

Indexed as

duodenal stentinggastric cancerinterventional endoscopyLAMSpancreatic cancerself-expanding metal stents

Identifiers

PMID38398115
PMCPMC10887005
OpenAlexW4391683610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.