ReviewEndoscopic ultrasound
EUS-guided gastroenterostomy
Review in Endoscopic ultrasound. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malignant gastric outlet obstruction is a frequent complication of advanced pancreatic and gastric antral malignancies requiring palliative intervention. EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) has emerged as an alternative to enteral stent placement (ESP), but comparative evidence remains limited. We conducted a pairwise and reconstructed individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing EUS-GE with duodenal stent placement in adults with malignant gastric outlet obstruction. Systematic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were performed from inception through November 15, 2025. Stent-related failure was the primary outcome and was analyzed as a time-to-event endpoint using reconstructed individual patient data from published Kaplan-Meier curves. Secondary outcomes included technical success, clinical success, overall survival, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. Random-effects models were applied using hazard ratios and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Ten studies comprising 1359 patients were included. EUS-GE was associated with a significantly lower rate of stent-related failure compared with duodenal stenting (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.73;
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.