Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42733339›Full record

ReviewClinical endoscopy2026

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided primary biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction: a review.

Shawn Chun Sum Teoh, Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shawn Chun Sum TeohSurgery Centre, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Hong Kong, China.
Anthony Yuen Bun TeohSurgery Centre, Hong Kong Sanatorium & Hospital, Hong Kong, China. anthony.yb.teoh@hksh.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately 70% of pancreatic cancers arising in the head of the pancreas cause malignant distal biliary obstruction. Therefore, biliary drainage is an important aspect of the management of these patients. Conventionally, the technique for relieving biliary obstruction has been endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). When ERCP cannot provide biliary drainage, such as in cases of failed cannulation, duodenal obstruction, or altered anatomy (e.g., after gastric bypass), endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been recommended by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy as the preferred technique over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for relieving biliary obstruction. Recently, EUS-BD has been explored as the primary technique for relieving biliary obstruction. The proposed benefits include higher technical success, shorter procedural time, a lower risk of pancreatitis, and longer stent patency. However, the results of randomized controlled studies have been conflicting. Hence, the aim of this article is to review the evidence from randomized controlled trials comparing EUS-BD with ERCP as the primary method of biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction.

Indexed as

Cholangiopancreatographyendoscopic retrograde; Endoscopygastrointestinal; Ultrasonographyinterventional

Identifiers

PMID42733339
PMCPMC13624767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.