Retrospective comparative study of new slim-delivery and conventional large-cell stents for stent-in-stent methods for hilar malignant biliary obstruction.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
Endoscopic management of unresectable hilar malignant biliary obstruction (HMBO) is technically challenging, and effectiveness of stent-in-stent using large-cell, metal stents was reported. A new, large-cell stent with a 6F tapered delivery system was recently developed. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of slim-delivery and conventional large-cell stents.
METHODS
This was a multicenter retrospective comparative study of stent-in-stent methods using slim-delivery stents (Niti-S Large Cell SR Slim Delivery [LC slim-delivery]) and conventional stents (Niti-S large-cell D-type; LCD) for unresectable HMBO.
RESULTS
Eighty-three patients with HMBO were included; 31 LC slim-delivery and 52 LCD. Overall technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 90% in LC slim-delivery group and 98% and 88% in LCD group. Use of the LC slim-delivery was associated with shorter stent placement time in the multiple regression analysis, with a stent placement time of 18 and 23 min in LC slim-delivery and LCD groups, respectively. The early adverse event (AE) rate of LC slim-delivery was 10%, with no cholangitis or cholecystitis as compared to 23% in the LCD group. Recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rates and time to RBO were comparable between the two groups: 35% and 44%, and 8.5 and 8.0 months in LC slim-delivery and LCD groups, respectively. The major cause of RBO was tumor ingrowth (82%) in the LC slim-delivery group and sludge (43%) and ingrowth (48%) in LCD group.
CONCLUSION
Stent-in-stent methods using LC slim-delivery shortened stent placement time with low early AE rates and comparable time to RBO in patients with HMBO.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.