ArticlePancreas2025
Comparison of Biliary Drainage Techniques for MBO: A Meta-Analysis.
Article in Pancreas, 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.
- Percutaneous Transhepatic Endobiliary Microwave Ablation Before Stenting for Malignant Obstructive Jaundice: Evidence Synthesis and Preliminary Technical Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Role of Endoscopy in Malignant Biliary Obstruction.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Current Perspectives on Endoscopic Nasobiliary Drainage: Optimizing Patient Management and Preventing Complications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
backgroundMalignant biliary obstruction (MBO) impacts patient health and quality of life. Biliary drainage techniques, including percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD), are commonly used, yet their relative advantages remain unclear.
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness and complications of EBD and PTBD in treating MBO.
methodsA systematic literature search in databases such as PubMed and EMBASE identified case-control trials comparing EBD and PTBD from January 2010 to the present. Five studies comprising 721 participants were analyzed. Outcome measures included technical success rate, incidence of complications, post-drainage pancreatitis, bleeding, major complications, hospital stay duration, and implant metastasis rates. Statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups regarding major complications, bleeding incidents, hospital stay, or implantation metastasis rates. However, PTBD showed a significantly lower incidence of complications and post-drainage pancreatitis compared to EBD.
conclusionPTBD may offer advantages over EBD in managing MBO, including fewer complications and reduced incidence of pancreatitis, suggesting PTBD as a potentially safer and more effective treatment option. Nonetheless, further large-scale, high-quality studies are needed to validate these findings.
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.