ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2026
A network meta-analysis on the optimal treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) caused by malignancy significantly impairs patient quality of life. Surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ), endoscopic stenting (ES), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) are the three main palliative treatments. However, the optimal approach remains unclear because of variations in study results and limited studies comparing treatment types. Objectives: To evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of EUS-GE, ES, and SGJ in the management of GOO. Design: Network meta-analysis. Data sources and methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for full-length articles of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in English comparing SGJ, ES, and EUS-GE in adult patients with malignant GOO. Studies with unbalanced baseline characteristics or technical variations within a single modality were excluded. The primary outcome was the reintervention rate for recurrent GOO. Secondary outcomes included clinical success and adverse event rates. Results: Fifty-four studies involving 6110 patients were analyzed (SGJ, Conclusion: Of the three treatments for GOO, EUS-GE demonstrated the most favorable profile in terms of efficacy, safety, and durability. SGJ remains a viable alternative, particularly in centers lacking expertise in advanced endoscopy. These findings may inform future clinical guidelines and support the broader adoption of EUS-GE in appropriate settings.
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.