Endoscopy · 2024
Biflanged metal stents versus plastic stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of walled-off necrosis: a randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Koduri Krithi Krishna, Jagtap Nitin, Lakhtakia Sundeep, Jahangeer Basha, Asif Shujaath, Talukdar Rupjyoti, Trikudanathan Guru, Tandan Manu, Kalapala Rakesh, Nabi Zaheer, Gupta Rajesh, Ramchandani Mohan, Singh Jagadish, Memon Sana Fatima, Rao G Venkat, Reddy D Nageshwar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of walled-off necrosis (WON) using either plastic or metal stents is the mainstay of WON management. Our single-center randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy of biflanged metal stents (BFMSs) and plastic stents for WON drainage.
METHODS: Patients with symptomatic WON amenable to EUS-guided drainage were randomized to receive either BFMSs or plastic stents. The primary outcome was reintervention-free clinical success at 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes were: overall clinical success (complete resolution of symptoms and significant reduction in size of WON [<50% of original size and <5 cm in largest diameter at 4-week follow-up]); number of reinterventions; adverse events (AEs); hospital stay for first admission; and medium-term outcomes at 6 months (recurrence, disconnected pancreatic duct, chronic pancreatitis, and new-onset diabetes mellitus).
RESULTS: 92 patients were randomized: 46 in each arm. The reintervention-free clinical success rate was significantly higher in the BFMS group on intention-to-treat analysis (67.4% vs. 43.5%; P = 0.02). Overall clinical success at 1 month was similar in both groups. There were significantly fewer reinterventions (median 0 [IQR 0-1] vs. 1 [0-2]; P = 0.03) and shorter hospital stays in the BFMS group (7.0 [SD 3.4] vs. 9.1 [5.5] days; P = 0.04). There were no differences in procedure-related AEs, mortality, or medium-term outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: BFMSs provide better reintervention-free clinical success at 4 weeks, with shorter hospital stay and without increased risks of AEs, compared with plastic stents for EUS-guided drainage of WON. Medium-term outcomes are however similar for both stent types.
METHODS: Patients with symptomatic WON amenable to EUS-guided drainage were randomized to receive either BFMSs or plastic stents. The primary outcome was reintervention-free clinical success at 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes were: overall clinical success (complete resolution of symptoms and significant reduction in size of WON [<50% of original size and <5 cm in largest diameter at 4-week follow-up]); number of reinterventions; adverse events (AEs); hospital stay for first admission; and medium-term outcomes at 6 months (recurrence, disconnected pancreatic duct, chronic pancreatitis, and new-onset diabetes mellitus).
RESULTS: 92 patients were randomized: 46 in each arm. The reintervention-free clinical success rate was significantly higher in the BFMS group on intention-to-treat analysis (67.4% vs. 43.5%; P = 0.02). Overall clinical success at 1 month was similar in both groups. There were significantly fewer reinterventions (median 0 [IQR 0-1] vs. 1 [0-2]; P = 0.03) and shorter hospital stays in the BFMS group (7.0 [SD 3.4] vs. 9.1 [5.5] days; P = 0.04). There were no differences in procedure-related AEs, mortality, or medium-term outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: BFMSs provide better reintervention-free clinical success at 4 weeks, with shorter hospital stay and without increased risks of AEs, compared with plastic stents for EUS-guided drainage of WON. Medium-term outcomes are however similar for both stent types.