Surgical endoscopy · 2023
The evaluation of bilateral stenting using braided or laser-cut self-expandable metallic stent for malignant hilar biliary obstruction.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Okuno Mitsuru, Iwata Keisuke, Mukai Tsuyoshi, Ohashi Yosuke, Iwata Shota, Iwasa Yuhei, Yoshida Kensaku, Maruta Akinori, Tezuka Ryuichi, Ichikawa Hironao, Mita Naoki, Uemura Shinya, Iwashita Takuji, Tomita Eiichi, Shimizu Masahito
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Bilateral self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (UMHBO) is an effective option for biliary drainage with long-term stent patency. Laser-cut and braided SEMS can be used for bilateral SEMS placement. This study aimed to clarify any differences in the clinical features and proper use of the laser-cut and braided SEMS placement using the stent-in-stent method for UMHBO.
METHODS: In this study, 78 patients who underwent bilateral stent-in-stent SEMS placement for UMHBO were included. The patients were divided into the laser-cut (n = 33) and braided groups (n = 45). Both groups were compared for technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), overall survival, and endoscopic reintervention (ERI).
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in technical and clinical success rates (laser-cut vs. braided group, 97% vs. 95.6%, P = 1.0), AEs (21.2% vs. 15.6%. P = 0.56), median TRBO (242 days vs. 140 days, P = 0.36), and median overall survival (654 days vs. 675 days, P = 0.58). ERI was required in 15 patients in the laser-cut group and in 20 patients in the braided group. The technical and clinical success rates of ERI (60% vs. 85%) were not significantly different (P = 0.13); however, the median ERI procedure time was significantly longer in the laser-cut group (38 min) than in the braided group (22 min; P = 0.02).
CONCLUSION: No significant difference in initial SEMS placement was noted between the laser-cut and braided groups; however, the laser-cut group required a longer ERI procedure time than that required by the braided group. The use of braided SEMS may be a convenient option for ERI.
METHODS: In this study, 78 patients who underwent bilateral stent-in-stent SEMS placement for UMHBO were included. The patients were divided into the laser-cut (n = 33) and braided groups (n = 45). Both groups were compared for technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO), overall survival, and endoscopic reintervention (ERI).
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in technical and clinical success rates (laser-cut vs. braided group, 97% vs. 95.6%, P = 1.0), AEs (21.2% vs. 15.6%. P = 0.56), median TRBO (242 days vs. 140 days, P = 0.36), and median overall survival (654 days vs. 675 days, P = 0.58). ERI was required in 15 patients in the laser-cut group and in 20 patients in the braided group. The technical and clinical success rates of ERI (60% vs. 85%) were not significantly different (P = 0.13); however, the median ERI procedure time was significantly longer in the laser-cut group (38 min) than in the braided group (22 min; P = 0.02).
CONCLUSION: No significant difference in initial SEMS placement was noted between the laser-cut and braided groups; however, the laser-cut group required a longer ERI procedure time than that required by the braided group. The use of braided SEMS may be a convenient option for ERI.