Table 1. Baseline patient characteristics of included EUS-GE studies.

Author	Year	Study design	EUS-GE technique	Stent size, type	No. patients	Follow-up period (mons)	Mean age (years)	No. males (%)	No. benign obstructions	No. of malignant obstructions	Procedure time (min)	Technical success	Clinical success	Serious adverse events	Minor adverse events	No. of re-interventions	Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment
Ge et al.	2019	Single-center, retrospective comparator study	Direct (n = 24)	15 × 10 mm CE-LAMS	22	–	66.4	9	0	22	–	24/24	23/24	3/24	2/24	2/25	5.5
Kerdsirihair at et al.	2018	Multicenter, retrospective non-comparator study	Direct (n = 57)	15 × 10 mm CE-LAMS	57	6.5	65	28	9	48	39	53/57	51/57	1/57	1/57	8/53	6.5
Chen et al. (Direct)	2018	Multicenter, retrospective comparator study	Direct (n = 52)	15 × 10 mm CE-LAMS and 15 × 10 mm NCE-LAMS	52	3.8	62.9	22	18	34	35.7	49/52	48/52	1/52	2/52	3/52	7.0
Chen et al. (Balloon)	2018	Multicenter, retrospective comparator study	Balloon-assisted (n = 22)	15 × 10 mm CE-LAMS and 15 × 10 mm NCE-LAMS	22	3.8	63.3	11	7	15	89.9	20/22	20/22	0/22	2/22	4/22	7.0
Itoi et al.	2016	Single-center, prospective non-comparator study	PASS (n = 20)	15 × 10 mm CE-LAMS	20	3.3		10	0	20	25.5	18/20	–	1/20	1/20	–	5.0
Tyberg et al.	2016	Multicenter, retrospective non-comparator study	Balloon-assisted (n = 13); Ultra-slim scope (n = 5); Nasobiliary drain (n = 3); Direct (n = 3); NOTES (n = 2)	15 × 10 mm and 10 × 10 mm CE-LAMS	26	1.8	66.2	11	9	17	–	24/26	22/26	3/26	2/26	1/26	6.0

CE-LAMS, cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent; NCE-LAMS, non-cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stent; PASS, EUS-guided double-balloon-occluded gastrojejunostomy bypass.