FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2980648052> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2980648052 endingPage "210" @default.
• W2980648052 startingPage "205" @default.
• W2980648052 abstract "BACKGROUND Although stenting for the treatment of large and multiple common bile duct stones has been acceptable to everyone, its efficacy and outcome have not been studied in comparison with other endoscopic procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare the consequences of stenting and endoscopic papilla balloon dilatation for the treatment of large and multiple common bile duct stones. METHODS In a double-blind clinical trial, of 431 patients with bile duct stones referred to the treatment center, 64 patients with multiple common bile duct stones ( ≥ 3) and more than 15 cm were selected for the study, then by random allocation rule the participants were allocated in two groups. They were entered into two different endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) and common bile ducts stenting treatments so that both procedures were performed by a person. Both groups were assessed from the point of views therapeutic outcomes such as duct cleaning, pancreatitis, isolated pain, and duct rupture. Data were collected by a self-made questionnaire that was used before and after the procedure to obtain the needed information. Then data were analyzed using SPSS software version 22 and descriptive and analytical tests were used as appropriated. RESULTS Although the duct cleaning and the complete removal of the stones in the stenting treatment procedure was 93.8%, and in EPBD was 78.3%, no significant difference was observed between the two groups (p = 0.14). Pancreatitis significantly increased after the first and second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the stent group compared with EPBD (p = 0.02). Also, the most frequent cases of isolated pain were in the endoscopic group EPBD (p = 0.0). However, the occurrence of perforation after first ERCP and EPBD was zero, but in the second stage of ERCP, 3.3% of the patients had perforations (p = 0.99). The results indicated that the shape of the stone (circular and angled) was not effective in the result of treatment in the two groups. CONCLUSION The results of this study indicated that in case of experience and skill in conducting the ERCP, common bile duct stenting is still the first line of treatment for large and multiple stones of the common bile ducts." @default.
• W2980648052 created "2019-10-25" @default.
• W2980648052 creator A5021118357 @default.
• W2980648052 creator A5026208642 @default.
• W2980648052 creator A5047660762 @default.
• W2980648052 creator A5048493929 @default.
• W2980648052 creator A5077058925 @default.
• W2980648052 creator A5086422946 @default.
• W2980648052 date "2019-11-05" @default.
• W2980648052 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2980648052 title "Consequences of Stenting and Endoscopic Papillary Balloon Dilatation in Treatment of Large and Multiple Common Bile Duct Stones" @default.
• W2980648052 cites W1586030241 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W1975334600 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W1997736031 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W1999614032 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W1999671858 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2014986095 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2018304019 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2027503627 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2036071638 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2038435256 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2042806708 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2064386366 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2074459317 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2089115083 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2117149431 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2130602856 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2141722647 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2148898391 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2171807792 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2410948087 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2440014366 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2560580582 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2598680531 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W2607118712 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W86943998 @default.
• W2980648052 cites W1555066060 @default.
• W2980648052 doi "https://doi.org/10.15171/mejdd.2019.150" @default.
• W2980648052 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6895848" @default.
• W2980648052 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31824623" @default.
• W2980648052 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2980648052 type Work @default.
• W2980648052 sameAs 2980648052 @default.
• W2980648052 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2980648052 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2980648052 hasAuthorship W2980648052A5021118357 @default.
• W2980648052 hasAuthorship W2980648052A5026208642 @default.
• W2980648052 hasAuthorship W2980648052A5047660762 @default.
• W2980648052 hasAuthorship W2980648052A5048493929 @default.
• W2980648052 hasAuthorship W2980648052A5077058925 @default.
• W2980648052 hasAuthorship W2980648052A5086422946 @default.
• W2980648052 hasBestOaLocation W29806480521 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C134984996 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C139059822 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C2775967933 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C2776884468 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C2778444009 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C2778583881 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C2779777945 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C3019365145 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C126838900 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C134984996 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C139059822 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C141071460 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C2775967933 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C2776884468 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C2778444009 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C2778583881 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C2779777945 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C3019365145 @default.
• W2980648052 hasConceptScore W2980648052C71924100 @default.
• W2980648052 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2980648052 hasLocation W29806480521 @default.
• W2980648052 hasLocation W29806480522 @default.
• W2980648052 hasLocation W29806480523 @default.
• W2980648052 hasLocation W29806480524 @default.
• W2980648052 hasOpenAccess W2980648052 @default.
• W2980648052 hasPrimaryLocation W29806480521 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W1631417401 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W1973483634 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W1995505384 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W2027633412 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W2170603762 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W2941882083 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W2978437094 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W2980648052 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W4361295470 @default.
• W2980648052 hasRelatedWork W72225866 @default.
• W2980648052 hasVolume "11" @default.
• W2980648052 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2980648052 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2980648052 magId "2980648052" @default.
• W2980648052 workType "article" @default.