Fishing line assisted endoscopic placement of multiple plastic biliary stents for unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction: a retrospective study
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background and aims
Stent migration is one of the most common complications during the placement of multiple plastic biliary stents (MPBS) under endoscopy. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of the fishing line assisted (FLA) method for preventing the complication. Methods
SUBMITTER: Zhang H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8603567 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background/aimsFor the management of hilar malignant biliary obstruction (HMBO), endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) is preferred over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) because of its convenience. However, there is no established guideline for malignant hilar obstruction that requires multiple stenting. In this study, we compared the efficacy of bilateral metal stents (BMS) versus multiple plastic stents (MPS).MethodsIn this retrospective study, we analyzed 102 patients who underwent EBD with either BMS or MPS due to HMBO caused by hilar cholangiocarcinoma between 1996 and 2018 at Samsung Medical Center. We compared the successful drainage rates, cholangitis events, overall complications, mortality, and conversion rates to PTBD between the two groups.ResultsThe successful drainage rates in the BMS group and the MPS group were 71.4% (25/35) and 65.6% (44/67), respectively, with no significant difference. The MPS group had a higher cholangitis risk (hazard ratio [HR], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21 to 3.58) and higher 6-month mortality (HR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.26 to 6.71) than the BMS group. There were no significant differences in overall complications or the conversion rate to PTBD between the groups.ConclusionsIn patients with malignant HMBO, the BMS group showed better outcomes in terms of the cholangitis rate and 6-month mortality than the MPS group. Therefore, if possible, bilateral metal stenting is recommended for HMBO caused by hilar cholangiocarcinoma.
| S-EPMC8593498 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endoscopic drainage of complex hilar tumors has generally resulted in poor outcomes. Drainage of >50% of liver volume has been proposed as optimal, but not evaluated using long multifenestrated plastic stents (MFPS) or self-expanding metal stents (SEMS). We evaluated outcomes of endoscopic drainage of malignant hilar strictures using optimal strategy and stents, and determined factors associated with stent patency, survival, and complications.Cross-sectional study was conducted at an academic center over 5 years. MFPS (10 French or 8.5 French) or open-cell SEMS were used for palliation of unresectable malignant hilar strictures, with imaging-targeted drainage of as many sectors as needed to drain >50% of viable liver volume. Risk factors were evaluated using regression analysis. The cumulative risk was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.77 patients with malignant hilar biliary strictures (median Bismuth IV) underwent targeted stenting (41 MFPS and 36 SEMS). Comparing MFPS vs. SEMS, technical success (95.1 vs. 97.2%, P=0.64), clinical success (75.6 vs. 83.3%, P=0.40), frequency of multiple stents (23/41 vs. 25/36, P=0.19), survival and adverse events were similar, but stent patency was significantly shorter (P<0.0001). Factors associated with survival were Karnofsky score and serum bilirubin level at presentation. Outcomes were independent of Bismuth class with acceptable results in Bismuth III and IV.Endoscopic biliary drainage with MFPS or open-cell SEMS targeting >50% of viable liver resulted in effective palliation in patients with complex malignant hilar biliary strictures. Patency was shorter in the MFPS group, but similar survival and complications were found when comparing MFPS and SEMS group.
| S-EPMC5587843 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10993820 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7221250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Background: Endoscopic management of hilar biliary obstruction is still challenging. Compared with unilateral drainage, bilateral drainage could preserve larger functional liver volume and potentially improve clinical outcomes. To evaluate the effectiveness of bilateral drainage, we conducted this multicenter randomized controlled study. (2) Methods: Patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction were assigned to unilateral or bilateral group. At first, patients underwent endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD), and subsequently underwent self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) deployment. Primary outcomes were the functional success rate of ENBD and time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) after SEMS deployment. (3) Results: During the study period, 38 and 39 patients were enrolled in the unilateral and bilateral groups. The functional success rate was similar in the uni- and bi-ENBD group (57% vs. 56%; p = 0.99), but the rate of additional drainage was higher in uni-ENBD group. Although TRBO and overall survival time after SEMS deployment were not different between the groups (p = 0.11 and 0.78, respectively), the incidence of early adverse events tended to be higher in the bi-SEMS group (5.3% vs. 28%; p = 0.11). (4) Conclusions: Our study failed to demonstrate the superiority of bilateral over unilateral biliary drainage in terms of functional success rate and TRBO.
| S-EPMC7827318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Endoscopic stent placement is used for palliative management of unresectable malignant hilar obstruction, which could be achieved by either unilateral or bilateral stent insertion. Materials and methods A literature search was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of metallic biliary stent placement in patients with malignant hilar obstruction. Weighted pooled rates (WPR) along with 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI) were calculated to determine and compare outcomes including technical and functional success, early and late adverse events, post procedure cholangitis, and stent occlusion between two groups. Results A total of 21 studies with 1292 patients were included. WPR of technical success was significantly higher in the unilateral group (97 %, 95 %CI: 93 -98 %) vs. bilateral group (89 %, 95 %CI: 84 -92 %) ( P = 0.0.003). WPR for functional success in the unilateral and bilateral groups were 96 % (95 %CI: 91 -98 %) and 94 % (95 %CI: 91 -97 %), respectively ( P = 0.48). The rate of early and late complications was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion In patients with unresectable malignant hilar obstruction, unilateral and bilateral metallic stenting techniques are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety.
| S-EPMC7035140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDrainage exceeding 50% of total liver volume is a beneficial prognostic factor in patients with unresectable malignant hilar biliary obstruction (UMHBO). However, it is unclear what threshold percentage of total liver volume drained ('liver drainage rate') significantly improves survival in patients with UMHBO who received systemic chemotherapy.ObjectivesWe aimed to assess the optimal liver drainage rate that improves survival in patients with UMHBO receiving chemotherapy using a three-dimensional (3D)-image volume analyzer.DesignThis study was a single-center retrospective cohort study.MethodsData from 90 patients with UMHBO who received chemotherapy after endoscopic biliary drainage using metal stents at Okayama University Hospital from January 2003 to December 2020 were reviewed. The liver drainage rate was calculated by dividing the drained liver volume by the total liver volume using a 3D-image volume analyzer. The primary endpoint was overall survival by liver drainage rate. The secondary endpoints were time to recurrent biliary obstruction (TRBO) and prognostic factors.ResultsThe median total liver volume was 1172 (range: 673-2032) mL, and the median liver drainage rate was 83% (range: 50-100). Overall survival was 376 (95% CI: 271-450) days, and patients with >80% drainage (n = 67) had significantly longer survival than those with <80% drainage (n = 23) (450 days versus 224 days, p = 0.0033, log-rank test). TRBO was 201 (95% CI: 155-327) days and did not differ significantly by liver drainage rate. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed >80% liver drainage [hazard ratio (HR): 0.35, 95% CI: 0.20-0.62, p = 0.0003] and hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.17-0.50, p < 0.0001) as significant prognostic factors.ConclusionIn patients with UMHBO scheduled for chemotherapy, >80% drainage is associated with improved survival. Further prospective multicenter studies are needed to verify the results of this study.Trail registrationOkayama University Hospital, IRB number: 2108-011.
| S-EPMC10612458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. Palliation in advanced unresectable hilar malignancies can be achieved by endoscopic (EBD) or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). It is unclear if one approach is superior to the other in this group of patients. Aims. Compare clinical outcomes of EBD versus PTBD. Methods. (i) Study Selection Criterion. Studies using PTBD and EBD for palliation of advanced unresectable hilar malignancies. (ii) Data Collection and Extraction. Articles were searched in Medline, PubMed, and Ovid journals. (iii) Statistical Method. Fixed and random effects models were used to calculate the pooled proportions. Results. Initial search identified 786 reference articles, in which 62 articles were selected and reviewed. Data was extracted from nine studies (N = 546) that met the inclusion criterion. The pooled odds ratio for successful biliary drainage in PTBD versus EBD was 2.53 (95% CI = 1.57 to 4.08). Odds ratio for overall adverse effects in PTBD versus EBD groups was 0.81 (95% CI = 0.52 to 1.26). Odds ratio for 30-day mortality rate in PTBD group versus EBD group was 0.84 (95% CI = 0.37 to 1.91). Conclusions. In patients with advanced unresectable hilar malignancies, palliation with PTBD seems to be superior to EBD. PTBD is comparable to EBD in regard to overall adverse effects and 30-day mortality.
| S-EPMC5014937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeEndoscopic bile duct decompression using bilateral self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) deployed via a stent-in-stent (SIS) method is considered a preferred procedure for malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO). However, occlusion thereof occurs frequently. Here, we investigated stent patency duration and risk factors related to stent obstruction with bilateral SIS placement for MHBO at two large centers.Materials and methodsThe present study reviewed data on patients with MHBO who underwent endoscopic biliary drainage using the SIS method. Clinical outcomes, including stent patency duration and patient overall survival, were analyzed. Factors associated with stent patency were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsSeventy patients with MHBO underwent endoscopic biliary drainage using the SIS method. Median age was 68 years old, and median follow-up duration was 140 days (interquartile range, 57-329). The proportion of high-grade MHBOs (Bismuth type IV) was 57.1%. Median stent patency duration with the SIS method was 108 days according to Kaplan-Meier curves. Median patient survival analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method was 181 days. Multivariate analysis indicated that higher baseline bilirubin (> 6.1 mg/dL) as an independent risk factor related to stent patency (p<0.05).ConclusionIn endoscopic biliary decompression using SEMS placed with the SIS method, obstructive jaundice was a risk factor for stent patency. The SIS method for high-grade MHBO showed short stent patency.
| S-EPMC6082981 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The optimal approach to the drainage of malignant obstruction at the liver hilum remains uncertain. We aim to compare percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) to endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) as the first intervention in patients with cholestasis due to suspected malignant hilar obstruction (MHO). METHODS:The INTERCPT trial is a multi-center, comparative effectiveness, randomized, superiority trial of PTBD vs. ERC for decompression of suspected MHO. One hundred and eighty-four eligible patients across medical centers in the United States, who provide informed consent, will be randomly assigned in 1:1 fashion via a web-based electronic randomization system to either ERC or PTBD as the initial drainage and, if indicated, diagnostic procedure. All subsequent clinical interventions, including crossover to the alternative procedure, will be dictated by treating physicians per usual clinical care. Enrolled subjects will be assessed for successful biliary drainage (primary outcome measure), adequate tissue diagnosis, adverse events, the need for additional procedures, hospitalizations, and oncological outcomes over a 6-month follow-up period. Subjects, treating clinicians and outcome assessors will not be blinded. DISCUSSION:The INTERCPT trial is designed to determine whether PTBD or ERC is the better initial approach when managing a patient with suspected MHO, a common clinical dilemma that has never been investigated in a randomized trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT03172832 . Registered on 1 June 2017.
| S-EPMC5813390 | biostudies-literature