ArticleEndoscopy international open2026
Which patients with palliative malignant biliary obstruction will benefit most from biliary drainage: Development and validation of a prognostic score.
Article in Endoscopy international open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and study aims: Biliary drainage is performed in palliative malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) to improve patient quality of life and enable chemotherapy. This study aimed to create and validate a prognostic score after biliary drainage in patients with palliative MBO. Patients and methods: Patients undergoing endoscopic or percutaneous drainage for palliative MBO were included in a multicenter, retrospective study. Probability factors associated with 30-day mortality were evaluated by univariable and multivariable logistic regression in the derivation cohort and a prognostic score was built and evaluated in an independent validation cohort. Results: The derivation cohort included 262 patients, 55% male, 61% of whom had pancreatic adenocarcinoma, mean age 72 years. Probability factors associated with 30-day mortality identified in the derivation cohort were World Health Organization performance status of 3-4 (odds ratio [OR] 7.7 [2.57-25.0] ; +3 points), liver metastases (OR 2.7 [1.06-6.98] ; +1 point), other metastases (OR 3.85 [1.57-9.97] ; +2 points), leukocytes >12G/l (OR 2.4 [0.94-6.08]; +1 point), total bilirubin > 10.8 mg/dL (OR 4.3 [1.45-15.20] ; +2 points) and creatininemia > 5.0 mg/dL (OR 7.3 [2.89-19.86]; +3 points). The multivariable model showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of 0.86 (95% confidence interval 0.80-0.93). The prognostic score was used to define two groups of patients, with a low (0-4 points) or high-probability (> 4 points) of 30-day mortality (3% and 32%, respectively). The AUROC in the validation cohort (192 patients) was 0.72, with 30-day mortality of 7% in the low- probability group and 22% in the high- probability group ( Conclusions: This score could be used in routine clinical practice to identify patients who have better survival outcomes after biliary drainage in palliative MBO.
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.