SynthesisDigestion2025
Biodegradable Stents for the Treatment of Refractory Benign Esophageal Strictures: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Digestion, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Introduction: Refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES) pose significant clinical challenges. Biodegradable (BD) stents have emerged as alternatives to traditional stenting methods, offering the possibility of reducing the need for multiple procedures. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BD stents in the treatment of RBES.
methodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Science Direct databases were searched according to the PRISMA statement. Studies that focused on the clinical outcomes of BD stents used in adult patients with RBES were included. Data on technical success and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects models. Efficacy data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.
resultsThe review included 15 studies with 241 BD stent implantations. The technical success rates were consistently high in all studies. The median time to restenosis was 21 weeks, with survival rates of 38.4% at 26 weeks and 27.0% at 52 weeks. The rate of complications requiring intervention was relatively low, but significant hyperplasia and pain occurred in 16.4% and 8.8% of the cases, respectively. Significant heterogeneity was observed in hyperplasia-related outcomes, which required a detailed subgroup analysis to investigate the underlying causes.
conclusionBD stents provide acceptable results in terms of efficacy and safety for the treatment of RBES. However, the evidence is limited owing to the lack of randomized controlled trials and comparative studies. Future research should focus on these areas to strengthen the clinical evidence regarding BD stents. </p>.
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.