Trial reportYonsei medical journal2026
SpyGlass Direct Visualization System: A Cost-Effective Approach Enhancing Nutritional and Immune Recovery in Difficult Bile Duct Stone Management.
Trial report in Yonsei medical journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04743089 (Cost-Effectiveness of Spyglass Direct Visualization System Facilitated Management for the Patients With Intrahepatic Bile Duct Stone and/or Large Extrahepatic Bile Duct Stone), which is not on this 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.
Cost-Effectiveness of Spyglass Direct Visualization System Facilitated Management for the Patients With Intrahepatic Bile Duct Stone and/or Large Extrahepatic Bile Duct Stone
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe SpyGlass DS II Direct Visualization System (SpyDS) is increasingly used as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy (PTCS) for difficult bile duct stones (DBDSs). This study compared clinical outcomes, costs, and post-procedural recovery between SpyDS and PTCS. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective interventional study was conducted including patients with DBDSs who underwent SpyDS-guided lithotripsy between December 2020 and December 2022. Patients treated with PTCS-guided lithotripsy between July 2018 and July 2020 were used as a comparison group. Primary endpoints were technical success rate and total hospital cost. Secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, procedure-related cost, adverse events, and markers of recovery, such as nutritional status, immune balance, and skeletal muscle mass.
resultsForty-three patients were included: 20 patients in the SpyDS group and 23 patients in the PTCS group. Technical success rates were 95.0% for SpyDS and 100% for PTCS. Median total hospital cost was lower in the SpyDS group in univariable analysis (
conclusionSpyDS achieved comparable technical success to PTCS and was associated with a markedly shorter hospitalization period. Although adjusted analyses did not show a significant cost difference, the shorter length of stay and favorable recovery trends suggest potential clinical and economic advantages. SpyDS may represent a practical alternative for DBDSs management. ClinicalTrials.gov trial number: NCT04743089.
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.