ArticleDEN open2026
Efficacy of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Transluminal Drainage Using Lumen-apposing Metal Stents for the Treatment of Pancreatic Fluid Collections.
Article in DEN open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insights into Acute Pancreatitis: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are able to develop secondary to either fluid leakage or liquefaction of acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic trauma, or after pancreatic surgery. While most PFCs resolve spontaneously, endoscopic procedures are sometimes necessary. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transluminal drainage (EUS-TD) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) is now widely performed for PFCs. This study investigated the incidence of complications and points to be considered during and after EUS-TD using LAMS for the treatment of patients with PFCs. Methods: This three-center retrospective study investigated patients who underwent EUS-TD using LAMS or using a double-pigtail plastic stent (DPS) for the treatment of PFCs at the University of Oita Hospital and affiliated institutions from December 2018 to June 2024. The primary outcome was the clinical success rate. Secondary outcomes included the technical success rate, endoscopic procedure time, LAMS indwell term, adverse events (AEs), and post-LAMS placement course. Results: Twenty-five patients (mean age, 67.5 ± 15.4 years; 76% male) underwent LAMS placement for PFCs. Median size of PFCs was 90 mm (range, 40-227 mm). A clinical success rate was achieved in 96%. The technical success rate was 96%, and the median endoscopic procedure time was 11 min (range, 5-32 min). Median LAMS indwell term was 46 days (range, 36-60 days). AEs were bleeding and stent migration. Post-LAMS placement course was good in 22 patients. No patients required re-treatment after LAMS removal. Conclusions: EUS-TD using LAMS is a simple procedure for the treatment of PFCs and appears clinically effective, highly safe, and efficient compared to conventional EUS-TD using DPS.
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.