ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Unilateral and bilateral radioactive stent insertion in patients diagnosed with inoperable hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a comparative analysis.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) patients commonly undergo radioactive stent (RS) insertion treatment, the relative benefits of unilateral versus bilateral RS insertion procedures remain to be established. Accordingly, this study was designed to evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of percutaneous bilateral and unilateral RS insertion for patients with HCCA. Methods: In total, 126 HCCA patients who underwent unilateral (n=64) or bilateral (n=62) RS insertion from January 2017 - December 2021 were included in this analysis. Treatment efficacy and long-term outcomes were compared between groups. The primary endpoint was stent patency, and the secondary endpoints included technical success rate, clinical success rate, local control rate, overall survival (OS), and complications. Results: The respective technical success rates in the unilateral and bilateral groups were 90.6% (58/64) and 93.5% (58/62) (P = 0.782). The clinical success rates were 82.8% and 86.2% in unilateral and bilateral groups, respectively (P = 0.608). Both groups exhibited comparable medial post-intervention bilirubin levels (100 vs. 99 μmol/L; P = 0.501), and restenosis occurred in 12 (20.7%) and 15 (25.9%) patients over the follow-up interval (P = 0.510). The stent reintervention rate was significantly higher in the unilateral group than bilateral group (66.7% vs. 0.0%, P < 0.001). The median stent patency in the unilateral and bilateral groups was 189 and 210 days, respectively (P = 0.796), while the median OS interval was 222 and 229 days, respectively (P = 0.969). Comparable cholangitis (17.2% vs. 22.4%, P = 0.485) and cholecystitis (3.4% vs. 3.4%, P = 1.000) rates were also detected in these two groups. Conclusions: In summary, HCCA patients exhibit comparable efficacy when undergoing unilateral and bilateral radioactive stenting, suggesting that unilateral RS can be routinely performed owing to the simpler nature of this procedure.
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.