Dataset Information

Long-term outcomes of fully covered self-expandable metal stents versus plastic stents in chronic pancreatitis.

ABSTRACT: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) related main pancreatic duct (MPD) stricture has been a challenge for endoscopists. Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FC-SEMS) has been tried in CP patients, but the efficacy and safety are still controversial. Thus, we aim to compare the long-term clinical efficacy of FC-SEMS vs. plastic stent placement in persistent MPD strictures secondary to CP. Between 2007 and 2018, 80 chronic pancreatitis patients (58 males, median age 49 years), who underwent endoscopic placement of FC-SEMS (n = 26) and plastic stent (n = 54) for persistent MPD strictures after at least 3 months of initial single plastic stenting, were retrospectively analyzed during a median follow-up duration of 33.7 months. As a result, MPD stricture resolution rate was statistically higher in FC-SEMS group (87.0% vs. 42.0%, p < 0.001). Although immediate complications occurred similarly (38.5% vs. 37.0%, p = 0.902), spontaneous migration (26.9%) and de novo strictures (23.1%) were pronounced delayed complications in FC-SEMS group. Pain relief during follow-up was significantly higher in FC-SEMS group (76.9% vs. 53.7%, p = 0.046). The total procedure cost was similar in both groups ($1,455.6 vs. $1,596.9, p = 0.486). In comparison with plastic stent, FC-SEMS placement for persistent MPD strictures had favorable long-term clinical efficacy, with its typical complications like spontaneous migration and de novo strictures.

SUBMITTER: Lee SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8329149 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimTo compare the efficacy of using covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMSs) and uncovered self-expandable metal stents (UCSEMSs) to treat objective jaundice caused by an unresectable malignant tumor.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive electronic search from 1980 to May 2015. All randomized controlled trials comparing the use of CSEMSs and UCSEMSs to treat malignant distal biliary obstruction were included.ResultsThe analysis included 1417 patients enrolled in 14 trials. We did not detect significant differences between the UCSEMS group and the CSEMS group in terms of cumulative stent patency (hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-4.53; p = 0.93, I2 = 0%), patient survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.05-10.87; p = 0.85, I2 = 0%), overall stent dysfunction (relative ratio (RR) 0.85, M-H, random, 95% CI 0.57-1.25; p = 0.83, I2 = 63%), the overall complication rate (RR 1.26, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 0.94-1.68; p = 0.12, I2 = 0%) or the change in serum bilirubin (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.13, IV fixed, 95% CI 0.56-0.3; p = 0.55, I2 = 0%). However, we did detect a significant difference in the main causes of stent dysfunction between the two groups. In particular, the CSEMS group exhibited a lower rate of tumor ingrowth (RR 0.25, M-H, random, 95% CI 0.12-0.52; p = 0.002, I2 = 40%) but a higher rate of tumor overgrowth (RR 1.76, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 1.03-3.02; p = 0.04, I2 = 0%). Patients with CSEMSs also exhibited a higher migration rate (RR 9.33, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 2.54-34.24; p = 0.008, I2 = 0%) and a higher rate of sludge formation (RR 2.47, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 1.36-4.50; p = 0.003, I2 = 0%).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis indicates that there is no significant difference in primary stent patency and stent dysfunction between CSEMSs and UCSEMSs during the period from primary stent insertion to primary stent dysfunction or patient death. However, when taking further management for occluded stents into consideration, CSEMSs is a better choice for patients with malignant biliary obstruction due to their removability.

Project description:BackgroundThe occurrence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) after using covered self-expandable metallic stents (CSEMS) and multiple plastic stents (MPS) in the therapy of benign biliary strictures (BBS) remains ambiguous, this analysis aimed to evaluate the outcomes.MethodsA systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the included studies were published between 2008 and 2021. The primary outcome was PEP, while the secondary outcomes were stricture resolution, recurrence, overall adverse events, costs, and ERCP sessions. Pooled effect sizes were calculated with the random-effects model or fixed-effects model depending on the heterogeneity.ResultsSix RCTs contained 444 patients (221 with CSEMS, 223 with MPS) finally included in the meta-analysis. The present analysis shows that compared to MPS, PEP is more likely to occur in CSEMS (OR [odds ratio] = 3.34, 95% confidence intervals [CI]:1.44-7.77, p = .005). CSEMS needs fewer ERCP sessions (Mean Deviation [MD]: -1.56; 95%CI:-2.66, -0.46], p = .006). The difference in stricture resolution and recurrence was not significant between the two stent types (OR = 0.87, 95%CI: 0.49-1.56, p = .64; and OR = 2.3, 95%CI: 0.68-7.76, p = .18). The incidence of overall adverse events was comparable between CSEMS and the MPS group (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.97-2.29, p = .07).ConclusionsCompared with MPS, CSEMS caused a significantly higher incidence of PEP but fewer ERCP procedures, while the rate of stricture resolution, recurrence, and overall adverse events were comparable. Prevention methods of PEP should be further evaluated in BBS when undergoing CSEMS placement.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022314864. Key messagesCSEMS and MPS placement remain a mainstay for patients with BBS, and severe complications after stent placement have not been compared.The incidence of PEP was higher after deployment of CSEMS compared to MPS.Prevention methods of PEP should be evaluated in BBS when undergoing CSEMS placement.

Dataset Information

Long-term outcomes of fully covered self-expandable metal stents versus plastic stents in chronic pancreatitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets