ReviewiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2026
Comparison of fully covered self-expandable metal biliary stents with or without anchoring double-pigtail plastic stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 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 Aims: Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FcSEMSs) have become the mainstay of treatment for a variety of biliary pathologies. However, FcSEMSs have been associated with a greater rate of stent migration than other types of stents. A technique of anchoring double-pigtail plastic stents (DPPSs) has been proposed to minimize migration of biliary FcSEMSs. Herein, we evaluated the efficacy of anchoring DPPSs among patients treated with biliary FcSEMSs. Methods: We performed a systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from database inception through August 2023. Full-text articles comparing FcSEMSs with or without anchoring DPPSs were included. We evaluated the following outcomes: (1) stent migration; (2) stent occlusion; (3) duration of stent patency; (4) cholangitis; (5) unplanned reinterventions; and (6) adverse events. Meta-analysis was carried out using random-effect models and reported as odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Results: Four studies encompassing 489 patients were included. Patients with anchoring DPPSs had a 67% reduction in FcSEMS migration compared with those without anchoring DPPSs (OR: 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.57; Conclusions: Anchoring DPPSs reduced the risk of FcSEMS migration and increased the duration of FcSEMS patency without an increased risk of adverse events. Future studies are needed to corroborate these findings, determine the optimal DPPS technique, and to compare DPPS placement with other antimigratory modalities.
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.