ArticleClinical endoscopy2025
Potential of 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stents for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction: a propensity score-matched study.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Complications of Endoscopic Biliary Stenting for Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction in Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Biliary Drainage During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Evidence and Practical Recommendations.Cancers · 2026Review
- Comparative study on the application of fully covered self-expanding metal stents in benign and malignant strictures of the distal bile duct.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Advancements in stent strategies for malignant distal biliary obstruction: defining the clinical role of multi-hole self-expandable metal stents.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- From dogma to individualized care: the potential of 6-mm fully covered self-expandable metal stent in unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction.Clinical endoscopy · 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
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsTo date, only thinner-diameter metal stents have been evaluated for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (UR-MDBO). This study investigated the outcomes and optimal cohorts for a 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) compared with those for a 10-mm-diameter FCSEMS.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent initial transpapillary metal stenting for UR-MDBO. Propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed.
resultsOf 133/68 patients who underwent 6-mm/10-mm-diameter FCSEMS deployment, 59 in each group were selected. The median time to recurrent biliary obstruction was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.46). In contrast, use of the 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS resulted in a significantly reduced incidence of stent-related adverse events (AEs) (p=0.016), especially cholecystitis (p=0.032), and patients aged <70 years were particularly affected by this significant reduction. Among the patients in the end-stage cohort who were unable to continue chemotherapy after FCSEMS deployment, the free rate of stent-related events, including recurrent biliary obstruction and stent-related AEs, was significantly higher in the 6-mm group (p=0.027).
conclusionsFor UR-MDBO, a 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS can be an optimal and safe option in the younger cohort with a relatively high risk of AEs and in the end-stage cohort requiring safer drainage without interference from stent-related events during times of poor prognosis.
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.