The American journal of gastroenterology · 2024
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided vs Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography-Guided Biliary Drainage as Primary Approach to Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Систематический обзорСтатьяМетаанализСравнительное 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.
Gopakumar Harishankar, Singh Ritu Raj, Revanur Vakya, Kandula Rajanikanth, Puli Srinivas R
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is an alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided transpapillary drainage in malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO). This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare the outcomes of these 2 approaches.
METHODS: Electronic databases from January 2005 through December 2023 were searched for RCTs comparing outcomes of EUS-BD and ERCP for treating MDBO. Pooled proportions, risk ratio (RR), and odds ratio were calculated using random-effects models.
RESULTS: Five RCTs comprising 519 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled RR for overall technical success with EUS-BD compared with ERCP was 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.96-1.16, P = 0.246, I2 = 61%) and for clinical success was 0.99 (95% CI = 0.95-1.04, P = 0.850, I2 = 0%). The pooled rate of procedure-related pancreatitis was 7.20% (95% CI = 3.60-13.80, I2 = 34%) in the ERCP group compared with zero in the EUS-BD group. The pooled RR for stent dysfunction with EUS-BD compared with ERCP was 0.48 (95% CI = 0.28-0.83, P = 0.008, I2 = 7%). The weighted mean procedure time was 13.43 (SD = 10.12) minutes for EUS-BD compared with 21.06 (SD = 6.64) minutes for ERCP. The mean stent patency was 194.11 (SD = 52.12) days in the EUS-BD group and 187 (SD = 60.70) days in the ERCP group.
DISCUSSION: EUS-BD is an efficient and safe alternative to ERCP in MDBO. An almost nonexistent risk of procedure-related pancreatitis, lower procedure time, and ease of use make this an attractive primary approach to biliary decompression in centers with expertise.
METHODS: Electronic databases from January 2005 through December 2023 were searched for RCTs comparing outcomes of EUS-BD and ERCP for treating MDBO. Pooled proportions, risk ratio (RR), and odds ratio were calculated using random-effects models.
RESULTS: Five RCTs comprising 519 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled RR for overall technical success with EUS-BD compared with ERCP was 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.96-1.16, P = 0.246, I2 = 61%) and for clinical success was 0.99 (95% CI = 0.95-1.04, P = 0.850, I2 = 0%). The pooled rate of procedure-related pancreatitis was 7.20% (95% CI = 3.60-13.80, I2 = 34%) in the ERCP group compared with zero in the EUS-BD group. The pooled RR for stent dysfunction with EUS-BD compared with ERCP was 0.48 (95% CI = 0.28-0.83, P = 0.008, I2 = 7%). The weighted mean procedure time was 13.43 (SD = 10.12) minutes for EUS-BD compared with 21.06 (SD = 6.64) minutes for ERCP. The mean stent patency was 194.11 (SD = 52.12) days in the EUS-BD group and 187 (SD = 60.70) days in the ERCP group.
DISCUSSION: EUS-BD is an efficient and safe alternative to ERCP in MDBO. An almost nonexistent risk of procedure-related pancreatitis, lower procedure time, and ease of use make this an attractive primary approach to biliary decompression in centers with expertise.