Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40884246›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastroenterology and hepatology2025

Clinical Success Impacts Overall Survival in Patients Undergoing Palliation for Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction Using Enteral Stents or Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Gastroenterostomy.

Akhil Mahajan, Sridhar Sundaram, Rahul Puri, G H Shravan, Kiran Mane, Aditya Kale, Shraddha Patkar, Mahesh Goel, Shailesh Shrikhande, Vikram Chaudhari and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Updated Classification of EUS-Guided Gastroenterostomy Misdeployment.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. EUS-guided gastroenterostomyEndoscopic ultrasound
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Akhil MahajanDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Sridhar SundaramDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2946-8534
Rahul PuriDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
G H ShravanDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Kiran ManeDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Aditya KaleDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6925-0214
Shraddha PatkarDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Mahesh GoelDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Shailesh ShrikhandeDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Vikram ChaudhariDivision of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Prachi PatilDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Shaesta MehtaDepartment of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) and enteral stents (ES) are minimally invasive options for managing malignant gastric outlet obstruction (mGOO). We aimed to compare EUS-GE with ES with respect to clinical success assessed objectively and overall survival.

methodsRetrospective review of patients > 18 years who underwent either ES or EUS-GE for palliation of mGOO between January 2021 and January 2024 was done. Primary outcomes were clinical success (defined as improvement of oral intake and tolerance of higher consistency diet compared to baseline by 2 points using GOOSS) and overall survival. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, reintervention rates, and reintervention-free survival.

resultsOne-hundred and seventy-two patients were included (112 ES group and 60 EUS-GE). The most common background malignancy was pancreatic cancer (30.2%), followed by gall-bladder cancer (26.2%). Technical success rates were similar (EUS-GE 95.08% and ES 99.09%; p = 0.123). Clinical success was achieved more often in those who underwent EUS-GE (94.7% vs. 77.5%, p = 0.004, OR 5.233). Overall survival (ES 112 days vs. EUS-GE 177 days, p = 0.787) was not statistically different in the two groups. Although reintervention was needed in ES more often (18.9% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.005, OR 5.392), reintervention-free survival (ES 93 days vs. EUS-GE 177 days, p = 0.581) did not differ. Overall survival was lower in those who did not achieve clinical success (clinical success-no, 49 days; yes, 134 days, p = 0.013).

conclusionEUS-GE could achieve better outcomes than ES in terms of the nature of oral intake feasible with lesser need for reintervention, with patients achieving clinical success surviving longer.

Indexed as

EndosonographyGastric Outlet ObstructionGastroenterostomyPalliative CareStentsSurgery, Computer-AssistedAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID40884246
PMCPMC12511821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.