ArticlePrzeglad gastroenterologiczny2024
Stent insertion for malignant hilar obstruction: a meta-analysis of percutaneous versus endoscopic approaches.
Article in Przeglad gastroenterologiczny, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Stent with radioactive seeds placement for obstructive hilar cholangiocarcinoma: comparison between unilateral and bilateral placement.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In an effort to treat patients with malignant hilar obstruction (MHO), both percutaneous trans-hepatic biliary stenting (PTBS) and endoscopic biliary stenting (EBS) strategies have been implemented in the clinic, but the relative advantages of these techniques remain to be clarified. Aim: This meta-analysis was designed to compare the relative clinical efficacy of PTBS and EBS in MHO patients.Material and methods: Relevant studies were identified through searches of the PubMed, Web of science, and Wanfang databases, and pooled analyses of these studies were then performed. Results: In total, this meta-analysis included 11 studies enrolling 530 and 645 patients who underwent PTBS and EBS, respectively. Pooled rates of technical success in the PTBS patients were significantly higher than those for EBS patients ( Conclusions: PTBS is superior to EBS with respect to many technical success and safety criteria when employed for the management of MHO patients.
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.