MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413097854 · doi:10.1055/a-2669-5801

Fully-covered metal stent removal failure in case of non-malignant biliary strictures: Risk factors and resolution technique

2025· article· en· W4413097854 on OpenAlex
Nicolò de Pretis, Lorenzo Santaera, Luigi Martinelli, Maria Cristina Conti Bellocchi, Laura Bernardoni, V. Fino, Adrian Miguel Pezua Sanjinez, Enrico Gasparini, Armando Gabbrielli, Luca Frulloni, Stefano Francesco Crinò

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEndoscopy International Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsPancreas Centre (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStentEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyAdverse effectRadiologySurgeryInternal medicinePancreatitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and study aims: Fully-covered-self-expandable-metal-stents (FC-SEMS) are commonly used for non-malignant biliary stricture treatment. Removal failure related to hyperplastic tissue development over the distal margin of the stent has been described but few data are available. FC-SEMS-in-FC-SEMS technique has been described in case reports to overcome FC-SEMS removal failure. Aims of this study were investigating technical success, clinical success, and safety of the FC-SEMS-in-FC-SEMS technique and identification of risk factors for FC-SEMS removal failure in patients with non-malignant distal biliary stricture. Patients and methods: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) procedures performed between January 1, 2020 and May 31, 2023 for FC-SEMS removal in non-malignant distal biliary strictures were retrospectively identified and analyzed. Cases of FC-SEMS-in-FC-SEMS technique were evaluated. Results: FC-SEMS-in-FC-SEMS technique was used in 15 patients. FC-SEMS removal was achieved after a single treatment in 13 patients (86.7%). In the remaining two patients (13.3%), it was necessary to repeat treatment to achieve FC-SEMS removal, with an overall technical and clinical success of 100%. No significant adverse events were recorded. Among the 50 patients undergoing ERCP for FC-SEMS removal during the study period (median dwell stenting period of 306.5 days; Q1-Q3:160-392), failure was observed in 15 cases (30%). Previous biliary stenting and dwell stenting period > 300 days were identified as risk factors for FC-SEMS removal failure. Conclusions: FC-SMES-in-FC-SEMS technique appears to be safe and effective to overcome FC-SEMS removal failure in patients with non-malignant distal biliary strictures. Reducing dwell stenting period, especially in patients with personal history of previous biliary stenting, may reduce risk of FC-SEMS removal failure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it