Medicine · 2026
Clinical evaluation of airway stent implantation in the treatment of airway stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hua Minglei, Li Ling, Du Xintan, Fu Zhenxue, Zhang Jie
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Airway stents, primarily metal and silicone types, are widely used to manage airway stenosis by providing a barrier against tumor or granulation tissue invasion and by stabilizing the airway lumen against external compression. However, different stent materials and designs are associated with varying complications, including granulation hyperplasia, mucus retention, and stent displacement. Understanding these outcomes is essential for optimizing stent selection and clinical management.
METHODS: A systematic analysis of the included studies was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using RevMan 5.3 and Stata software. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated using the Q-test and I2 statistics. Complications and therapeutic outcomes were compared between benign and malignant airway stenosis cases treated with airway stent implantation.
RESULTS: The analysis showed that patients with benign airway stenosis experienced a lower probability of complications following stent implantation compared with those with malignant airway stenosis. Moreover, the therapeutic effect of stent implantation was superior in benign cases. The meta-analysis further confirmed that airway stents are more effective for benign airway stenosis, with fewer adverse events and better overall outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Airway stent implantation demonstrates greater efficacy and fewer complications in the treatment of benign airway stenosis compared with malignant airway stenosis. Awareness of stent-specific complications can guide clinicians in personalized management strategies to improve disease recovery and enhance the clinical utility of airway stents.
METHODS: A systematic analysis of the included studies was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using RevMan 5.3 and Stata software. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated using the Q-test and I2 statistics. Complications and therapeutic outcomes were compared between benign and malignant airway stenosis cases treated with airway stent implantation.
RESULTS: The analysis showed that patients with benign airway stenosis experienced a lower probability of complications following stent implantation compared with those with malignant airway stenosis. Moreover, the therapeutic effect of stent implantation was superior in benign cases. The meta-analysis further confirmed that airway stents are more effective for benign airway stenosis, with fewer adverse events and better overall outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Airway stent implantation demonstrates greater efficacy and fewer complications in the treatment of benign airway stenosis compared with malignant airway stenosis. Awareness of stent-specific complications can guide clinicians in personalized management strategies to improve disease recovery and enhance the clinical utility of airway stents.