Expert review of medical devices · 2016
Biodegradable stents for the treatment of refractory or recurrent benign esophageal stenosis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Imaz-Iglesia Iñaki, García-Pérez Sonia, Nachtnebel Anna, Martín-Águeda Belén, Sánchez-Piedra Carlos, Karadayi Bilgehan, Demirbaş Ali Rıza
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Esophageal stents are used for the treatment of refractory and recurrent dyphagias. In 2007, esophageal biodegradable stents (EBS) were authorised as an alternative to existing metal and plastic stents in Europe. The advantages claimed for EBS are fewer complications concerning tissue ingrowth, stent migration and stent removal.
AREAS COVERED: We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EBS compared to fully-covered self-expanding metal stents, self-expanding plastic stents, and esophageal dilation for the treatment of refractory or recurrent benign esophageal stenosis. Three comparative studies (one randomized controlled trial and two cohort studies) were assessed. The studies used different inclusion criteria, had a very small (sample) size and the quality of the evidence was very low. Expert commentary: The current evidence is insufficient to determine the relative efficacy or safety of esophageal biodegradable stents. The results of this systematic review should be updated once new evidence is available.
AREAS COVERED: We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EBS compared to fully-covered self-expanding metal stents, self-expanding plastic stents, and esophageal dilation for the treatment of refractory or recurrent benign esophageal stenosis. Three comparative studies (one randomized controlled trial and two cohort studies) were assessed. The studies used different inclusion criteria, had a very small (sample) size and the quality of the evidence was very low. Expert commentary: The current evidence is insufficient to determine the relative efficacy or safety of esophageal biodegradable stents. The results of this systematic review should be updated once new evidence is available.