ArticleCurrent health sciences journal
Esophageal Stenting Using Laparogastroscopy Compared With Esophageal Endoscopic Stenting: Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Current health sciences journal. 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
Esophageal stenosis is a debilitating condition that impairs swallowing and markedly reduces quality of life. Its etiology is multifactorial, including gastroesophageal reflux, radiation, caustic and surgical injuries, benign and malignant tumors. Endoscopic stenting represents a modern, minimally invasive treatment, yet some cases remain refractory to such approaches. Surgical options in benign strictures are limited, often leading to feeding enterostomies that compromise patient outcomes. Laparo-gastroscopic esophageal endoprosthesis, introduced in 1997, bridges endoscopy and surgery, reducing morbidity. This hybrid technique offers a reliable alternative for patients unfit for conventional surgical repair. Our study evaluates its role compared to standard endoscopic stenting, focusing on patient selection, outcomes, and dysphagia improvement.
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.