Fully-covered metal stent removal failure in case of non-malignant biliary strictures: Risk factors and resolution technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".