Copyright
©The Author(s) 2019.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Apr 16, 2019; 11(4): 281-291
Published online Apr 16, 2019. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v11.i4.281
Published online Apr 16, 2019. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v11.i4.281
Parameter | Risk of bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Publication bias | Overall certainty of evidence |
No. of patients (studies) | ||||||
Technical success | ||||||
222 (3 RCTs) | Not serious | Not serious | Not serious | Seriousa | None | Moderate |
Clinical success | ||||||
155 (2 RCTs) | Seriousb | Not serious | Seriousc | Seriousa | None | Very low |
Procedure duration | ||||||
222 (3 RCTs) | Not serious | Very seriousd | Seriouse | Seriousa | None | Very low |
Adverse events | ||||||
222 (3 RCTs) | Not serious | Very seriousd | Not serious | Seriousa | None | Very low |
Stent patency | ||||||
97 (2 RCTs) | Seriousb | Not serious | Seriouse | Seriousa | None | Very low |
Stent dysfunction | ||||||
155 (2 RCTs) | Not serious | Not serious | Seriouse | Not serious | Strongly suspected | Low |
- Citation: Logiudice FP, Bernardo WM, Galetti F, Sagae VM, Matsubayashi CO, Madruga Neto AC, Brunaldi VO, de Moura DTH, Franzini T, Cheng S, Matuguma SE, de Moura EGH. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography biliary drainage for obstructed distal malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 11(4): 281-291
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v11/i4/281.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v11.i4.281