ArticleBMC surgery2025
A single-center retrospective cohort study on the efficacy and safety of temporary endoscopic nasobiliary drainage in patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction with endoscopic biliary stent.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic biliary stent (EBS) is the preferred palliative treatment for patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO). We tried endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) within 2 weeks after EBS to improve the adverse events and stent patency time after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).
methodsA total of 285 eligible patients with unresectable MBO were divided into EBS group and EBS + ENBD group. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were compared.
resultsThe EBS + ENBD group (n = 74) was similar to the EBS group (n = 211) in clinical characteristics and improvement in liver function after ERCP. The two groups were also similar in terms of stent clinical success rate, incidence of postoperative cholangitis, postoperative bleeding and postoperative pancreatitis. 69 patients in the EBS group and 10 patients in the EBS + ENBD group were followed up continuously. The results showed that the EBS + ENBD group was higher than the EBS group in terms of stent patency time (246.1 days, 95% CI, 141.3-351.0 days vs. 195.3 days, 95% CI, 163.0-227.5 days; P = 0.420), but it was not statistically significant.
conclusionFor patients with unresectable MBO, compared with EBS alone, ENBD placement after EBS for temporary biliary drainage may improve liver function and reduce adverse events.
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.