MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.10.013

Медицинская библиотека · Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021

Endoscopic Treatment of Large Bile Duct Stones: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Facciorusso Antonio, Gkolfakis Paraskevas, Ramai Daryl, Tziatzios Georgios, Lester Janice, Crinò Stefano Francesco, Frazzoni Leonardo, Papanikolaou Ioannis S, Arvanitakis Marianna, Blero Daniel, Lemmers Arnaud, Eisendrath Pierre, Fuccio Lorenzo, Triantafyllou Konstantinos, Gabbrielli Armando, Devière Jacques

СтатьяNetwork Meta-AnalysisПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several endoscopic methods have been proposed for the treatment of large biliary stones. We assessed the comparative efficacy of these treatments through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Nineteen randomized controlled trials (2752 patients) comparing different treatments for management of large bile stones (>10 mm) (endoscopic sphincterotomy, balloon sphincteroplasty, sphincterotomy followed by endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation [S+EPLBD], mechanical lithotripsy, single-operator cholangioscopy [SOC]) with each other were identified. Study outcomes were the success rate of stone removal and the incidence of adverse events. We performed pairwise and network meta-analysis for all treatments, and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria to appraise the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

All treatments except mechanical lithotripsy significantly outperformed sphincterotomy in terms of stone removal rate (risk ratio [RR], 1.03-1.29). SOC was superior to other adjunctive interventions (vs balloon sphincteroplasty [RR, 1.24; 95% CIs, 1.07-1.45], vs S+EPLBD [RR, 1.23; range, 1.06-1.42] and vs mechanical lithotripsy [RR, 1.34; range, 1.14-1.58]). Cholangioscopy ranked the highest in increasing the success rate of stone removal (surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score, 0.99) followed by S+EPLBD (SUCRA score, 0.68). SOC and S+EPLBD outperformed the other modalities when only studies reporting on stones greater than 15 mm were taken into consideration (SUCRA scores, 0.97 and 0.71, respectively). None of the assessed interventions was significantly different in terms of adverse event rate compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy or with other treatments. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding were the most frequent adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with large bile stones, cholangioscopy represents the most effective method, in particular in patients with larger (>15 mm) stones, whereas S+EPLBD could represent a less expensive and more widely available alternative.

Для цитирования: Facciorusso Antonio, Gkolfakis Paraskevas, Ramai Daryl, Tziatzios Georgios, Lester Janice, Crinò Stefano Francesco, Frazzoni Leonardo, Papanikolaou Ioannis S, Arvanitakis Marianna, Blero Daniel, Lemmers Arnaud, Eisendrath Pierre, Fuccio Lorenzo, Triantafyllou Konstantinos, Gabbrielli Armando, Devière Jacques. Endoscopic Treatment of Large Bile Duct Stones: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.. Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.10.013.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.