ArticleJournal of digestive diseases
Endoscopic Intervention and Surgical Treatment of Benign Biliary-Enteric Anastomotic Stricture: Real-World Clinical Impact.
Article in Journal of digestive diseases. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough endoscopic interventions and surgery are both used for treating bening biliary-enteric anastomotic stricture (BEAS), their comparative efficacy, safety, and economic impact have not been established. We conducted this study to address that gap.
methodsPatients who underwent endoscopic intervention or surgical treatment for benign BEAS at Changhai Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Shanghai, China) from February 2013 to February 2024 were included. The primary end-point was stricture resolution rate. Secondary end-points included adverse events (AEs), length of hospital stay, and total hospitalization cost.
resultsThere were 65 and 58 patients underwent endoscopic intervention and surgical treatment for benign BEAS, respectively. The stricture resolution rate was lower in the endoscopic intervention group than in the surgical treatment group (78.5% vs. 93.1%, p = 0.024); however, endoscopic intervention achieved an ultimate stricture resolution rate of 90.8%. Endoscopic intervention had significantly lower rates of overall AE (9.2% vs. 27.6%, p = 0.01) and early AE (occurred within 30 days after surgery/endoscopic intervention) (4.6% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.002). In addition, endoscopic intervention resulted in a shorter length of hospital stay (10 days vs. 13 days, p = 0.013) and a lower hospitalization cost (CNY 24 355 vs. CNY 35 663, p < 0.001).
conclusionsIn benign BEAS, surgery achieved a higher stricture resolution rate, whereas endoscopic intervention offered superior short-term outcomes, including shorter hospital stay, lower costs, and fewer AEs. Hence, we recommend initial endoscopic intervention with surgery reserved for nonresponders and recurrent cases.
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.