SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025
Metal versus plastic stents for EUS-guided walled-off necrosis drainage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Directional Patterns in Ruptured Pancreatic Fluid Collections: A Ten-Patient Case Series and Proposed Framework for Management.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Endoscopic Single-Gated Compared to Multigated Approach using Lumen Apposing Metal Stents in the Management of Necrotizing Pancreatitis.Endoscopy international open · 2026Article
- Lumen-apposing metal stents versus double pigtail plastic stents for early (<4 weeks of illness) endoscopic transluminal drainage of pancreatic necrotic collections.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
objectiveThe endoscopic step-up approach is the mainstay of walled-off necrosis management (WON). However, using metal stents versus plastic stents during WON drainage is debatable, with limited high-quality evidence. Therefore, we aim to investigate the comparative safety and efficacy of metal versus plastic stents for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided WON drainage.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs), retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, WOS, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through July 2024. Continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were pooled using mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR), with confidence interval (CI) using Stata MP v. 17. We assessed heterogeneity using the chi-square test and I PROSPERO ID: CRD42024573859.
resultsSix RCTs with 352 patients were included. There was no difference between both groups regarding clinical success (RR: 1.04 with 95% CI [0.88-1.23], p = 0.61), WON recurrence (RR: 1.46 with 95% CI [0.59-3.61], p = 0.41), the need of necrosectomy (RR: 0.96 with 95% CI [0.65-1.41], p = 0.84), the total number of necrosectomy sessions (MD: 1.03 with 95% CI [- 0.33, 2.40], p = 0.14), total number of interventions (MD: - 0.09 with 95% CI [- 0.72, 0.54], p = 0.79), mortality (RR: 0.87 with 95% CI [0.32-2.37], p = 0.79), bleeding (RR: 1.35 with 95% CI [0.58-3.12], p = 0.48), and stent migration (RR: 0.69 with 95% CI [0.28-1.71], p = 0.42). However, metal stents significantly decreased the procedure duration (MD: - 11.27 with 95% CI [- 17.69, - 4.86], p < 0.001).
conclusionThere was no significant difference between metal and plastic stents in efficacy and safety outcomes during WON EUS-guided drainage, except for a shorter procedural duration with metal stents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40097850What 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.